Electronic design for integrated circuits based on process related variations

ABSTRACT

A pattern-dependent model is used to predict variations of feature dimensions of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated in accordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabrication process that will impart topographical variations to the integrated circuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, and an impact is determined of the variations of feature dimensions on electrical characteristics of the integrated circuit. An impact is determined of the topological variations on electrical characteristics of the integrated circuit. An RC extraction tool is used in conjunction with the using of the model and the determining of the impact.

This application is a continuation in part of, and claims the benefit ofpriority of, U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/165,214, 10/164,844now U.S. Pat. No. 7,124,386, Ser. No. 10/164,847 now U.S. Pat. No.7,152,215, and Ser. No. 10/164,842, now abandond all filed Jun. 7, 2002,and Ser. No. 10/200,660, filed Jul. 22, 2002, all assigned to the sameassignee as this patent application. The contents of those patentapplications are incorporated by reference here.

BACKGROUND

This description relates to lithography mask creation for integratedcircuits (ICs).

Lithography mask creation and printing assume that projection is done ona film, within a predetermined depth of focus range. However patterndependencies between the process by which the ICs are fabricated and thepattern that is being created often cause processed films to havesignificant variation in thickness across a surface, resulting invariation in feature dimensions (e.g. line widths) of integratedcircuits (ICs) that are patterned using the mask. As successivenon-conformal layers are deposited and polished, the variation becomesworse. Because interconnect lines and connections on higher layers carrypower to portions of the chip, the variations can increase the sheetresistance and thus affect the power effectiveness of the chip.

One way to reduce the variations in fabricated chips is to make physicalmeasurements on manufactured wafers containing initial designs ofdevices and use these measurements to adjust the mask design. Othermethods to reduce variation include optical proximity correction (OPC)where subwavelength distortions due to patterned features are identifiedand corrected.

SUMMARY

In general, in one aspect, the invention features a method comprisingusing a pattern-dependent model to predict variations of featuredimensions of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variations to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, and determining an impactof the variations of feature dimensions on electrical characteristics ofthe integrated circuit.

In general, in another aspect, the invention features a methodcomprising using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variation to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, and determining an impactof the topological variations on electrical characteristics of theintegrated circuit.

Implementations of the invention may include one or more of thefollowing features. Variations are predicted of feature dimensions ofthe integrated circuit and an impact is determined of the variations offeature dimensions of the integrated circuit. The electricalcharacteristics include sheet resistance, capacitance, drive current,signal integrity, power distribution and, when multiple interconnectlevels are considered, timing closure analysis. The design is verifiedas meeting predetermined criteria. The masks used in the lithography oretch process are adjusted in accordance with the determined impact. Thedesign is adjusted in response to the determined impact to improvemanufacturability of the integrated circuit. The design is adjusted inresponse to the determined impact to improve circuit performance of theintegrated circuit. The prediction is performed with respect to aninterconnect level of the integrated circuit. The prediction isperformed with respect to an multiple levels of the integrated circuit.The placement of dummy fill or slotting structures is determined basedon the determining of the impact. The placement of electrical componentsin the integrated circuit is determined based on the determining of theimpact. The routing of interconnect regions between electricalcomponents of the integrated circuit is determined based on thedetermining of the impact. The integrated circuit comprises asystem-on-chip (SoC) device and the method also includes determining therouting of interconnect regions in the SoC device. The geometry ofelectrical features, interconnect lines, or vias in the design of theintegrated circuit is determined based on the determining of the impact.An electronics design automation (EDA) tool is used in conjunction withthe predicting and the determining. At least one of the predicting andthe determining is provided as a service in a network. The networkcomprises an intranet, an extranet, or an internet, and the predictingor determining is provided in response to user requests.

In general, in another aspect, the invention features a methodcomprising using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variation to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, and determining an impactof the topological variations on electrical characteristics of theintegrated circuit, and using an RC extraction tool in conjunction withthe using of the model and the determining of the impact.

In general, in another aspect, the invention features a methodcomprising using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations and variations of feature dimensions of an integrated circuitthat is to be fabricated in accordance with a design by a process thatincludes (a) a fabrication process that will impart topographicalvariation to the integrated circuit and (b) a lithography or etchprocess, and determining an impact of the topological variations onelectrical characteristics of the integrated circuit, and using an RCextraction tool in conjunction with the using of the model and thedetermining of the impact.

Implementations of the invention may include one or more of thefollowing features. The technique is performed on sub-portions of thecircuit. The feature dimensions are associated with at least one ofprinted feature width, etch trench width, etch trench depth, etchedsidewall angle, dishing, erosion, or total copper loss. The electricalcharacteristics comprise at least one of sheet resistance, capacitance,drive current, signal integrity, power distribution and, timing closure.At least one of the predicting or the determining is provided as aservice in a network. The method of claim in which the network comprisesan intranet, an extranet, or an internet, and the predicting ordetermining is provided in response to user requests.

A mask design is generated for patterning a test wafer using alithographic or etch process, the process is characterized based on thepatterned test wafer, and a pattern-dependent model is used based on thecharacterization to predict characteristics of integrated circuits thatare to be fabricated by the lithographic or etch process.

Other advantages and features of the invention will become apparent fromthe following description and from the claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates how lithography works.

FIG. 2 describes the process for using IC designs and patterns to createlithography masks.

FIG. 3 illustrates a case in which the focal distance to an alignmentkey is proper; but chip-level variation is outside the depth of focuslimits.

FIG. 4 shows where lithography fits within a damascene process.

FIG. 5 illustrates pattern dependencies for electroplated copperdeposition (ECD).

FIG. 6A illustrates film thickness variation that results from oxidechemical mechanical polishing (CMP).

FIG. 6B illustrates erosion, dishing and corner rounding effectsassociated with a CMP step used in a process of forming of shallowtrench isolation (STI).

FIG. 6C illustrates copper dishing, dielectric erosion and residualcopper effects associated with a copper CMP step used in damasceneprocesses.

FIG. 7A illustrates a top-down view of different density features withina square region.

FIG. 7B illustrates the variation in oxide thickness for features withina region.

FIG. 8 illustrates how surface topography may affect printed featuredimensions.

FIG. 9 illustrates how feature density may affect printed featuredimensions.

FIG. 10A provides a high-level flow diagram of a method.

FIG. 10B provides a high-level flow diagram of a method for designverification

FIG. 10C provides a high-level flow diagram of a method for maskcorrection

FIG. 11 describes an application in which designs are modified to meetdesired printed or etched feature dimensions.

FIG. 12 describes an application in which designs are not modified tomeet desired printed or etched feature dimensions.

FIG. 13A describes steps commonly used for layout generation.

FIG. 13B describes steps commonly used for layout generation when designverification is inserted into the design flow.

FIG. 14A illustrates the steps involved in layout extraction.

FIG. 14B illustrates a continuation of the steps involved in layoutextraction.

FIG. 14C illustrates a continuation of the steps involved in layoutextraction.

FIG. 15 illustrates the relationship between spatial regions across thechip and the creation of a layout extraction table.

FIG. 16 describes a process model component.

FIG. 17A illustrates the use of product wafers in calibrating a tool fora particular recipe.

FIG. 17B illustrates the use of test wafers in calibrating a tool for aparticular recipe.

FIG. 18 illustrates how a calibration is used to map layout features tofilm thickness variation.

FIG. 19A illustrates the use of a calibration mapping to predict filmthickness variation for an IC design.

FIG. 19B illustrates how wafer-state parameters, such as film thicknessvariation, can be used to predict electrical parameters.

FIG. 20 illustrates steps in a calibration process.

FIG. 21A illustrates steps in a prediction of full-chip topography.

FIG. 21B illustrates a continuation of the steps in prediction of chiptopography.

FIG. 21C illustrates a continuation of the steps in prediction of chiptopography.

FIG. 21D illustrates a continuation of the steps in prediction of chiptopography

FIG. 22A illustrates an overview of a prediction of feature dimensions(e.g. line widths) resulting from lithography process steps or flows.

FIG. 22B illustrates a mapping provided by a etch prediction component

FIG. 23 illustrates a mapping provided by a lithography predictioncomponent

FIG. 24 illustrates steps in generating a feature dimension variationprediction with regard to variation in chip topography

FIG. 25 illustrates steps in generating a feature dimension variationprediction with regard to variation in chip feature density

FIG. 26A illustrates the use of test wafers to calibrate a lithographymodel to a particular tool and recipe.

FIG. 26B illustrates the use of calibrated lithography models to predictfeature dimension variation.

FIG. 27 illustrates steps in using calibrated lithography models topredict feature dimension variation.

FIG. 28 illustrates an overview of a verification and correctioncomponent.

FIG. 29A illustrates steps in verification option A.

FIG. 29B illustrates steps in verification option B.

FIG. 29C illustrates steps in verification option C.

FIG. 29D illustrates steps in verification option D.

FIG. 30 illustrates an overview of a correction component.

FIG. 31 illustrates steps to compute modifications to a layout.

FIG. 32 illustrates the steps to compute modifications to a layout Usingtest wafer data.

FIG. 33A illustrates a relationship between process model predictions ofsurface topography and a prediction of feature dimension using alithography model component.

FIG. 33B illustrates a use of errors in predicted versus desireddimensions to modify features in a layout to improve printed featuredimensions.

FIG. 34A illustrates a process for computing relationships among featurewidth, feature space, density or height.

FIG. 34B illustrates how surface topography is related to designparameters, such as feature width, feature space and density beforeinput into a lithography model.

FIG. 34C illustrates how test wafers may be used to compute mathematicalrelationships between feature width, feature space, and density for agiven height or thickness.

FIG. 35 illustrates how a process may be used iteratively to domulti-layer verification and correction.

FIG. 36A illustrates steps in using a lithography test wafer.

FIG. 36B shows an example of a table relating test wafer parameters.

FIG. 37A shows a stack for a lithography test wafer.

FIG. 37B shows metal level 1 of a lithography test wafer.

FIG. 37C shows via level 1 of a lithography test wafer.

FIG. 37D shows the metal level 2 of a lithography test wafer.

FIG. 38 illustrates a section of varying line widths and line spaces inmetal level 1.

FIG. 39 illustrates a sub-section of fixed line widths and line spacesin metal level 1.

FIG. 40 illustrates a same sub-section with varied line widths and linespaces for metal level 2.

FIG. 41A illustrates patterns in metal level 1 and metal level 2.

FIG. 41B illustrates metal level 2 superimposed on metal level 1.

FIG. 42 illustrates varying array structures in metal level 1.

FIG. 43 illustrates a large array of vias in via level 1.

FIG. 44A illustrates patterns in metal level 1 and via level 1.

FIG. 44B illustrates via level 1 pattern superimposed on metal level 1pattern.

FIG. 45A illustrates three areas of slotting structures in metal level1.

FIG. 45B illustrates slotting patterns for three areas in metal level 1.

FIG. 45C illustrates a via pattern in the via level 1 superimposed onmetal level 1 slotting structures.

FIG. 45D illustrates a metal level 2 pattern superimposed on via level 1and metal level 1 patterns.

FIG. 46A illustrates an application of a method to address surfacetopography.

FIG. 46B depicts an impact of a method when surface topography occurs.

FIG. 47A illustrates an application of a method to address featuredensity.

FIG. 47B depicts an impact of a method when feature density occurs.

FIG. 48 illustrates an application of a stepper mechanism to addresswafer-level surface variation.

FIG. 49 illustrates a stepper mechanism with a proper focal distance toan alignment key and including imaged areas within the chip that areoutside of the depth of focus

FIG. 50 illustrates an application of a method to a chip-level steppermechanism.

FIG. 51 illustrates an implementation of a method using computerhardware, software and networking equipment.

FIG. 52A illustrates an implementation of a method where client andserver reside or are bundled with other software on a single computer.

FIG. 52B illustrates an implementation of a method where the client andserver communicate via a network.

FIG. 53 illustrates an implementation of the method where the clientcommunicates with a server and web services via a network.

FIG. 54 illustrates an implementation of a method within an electronicdesign automation (EDA tool).

FIG. 55 illustrates a use of the implementation within an EDA tool.

FIG. 56 illustrates a use of the implementation communicating with anFDA tool via a network.

FIG. 57 illustrates use of the method within a design for manufacturingsystem.

FIG. 58 illustrates use of the method within a design for manufacturingsystem for choosing lithography related tool settings, recipes orconsumable sets.

FIG. 59 illustrates a GUI for managing layout extractions from multipledesigns.

FIG. 60A illustrates results from a feature width extraction from a chiplayout.

FIG. 60B illustrates results from extraction binning based upon featurewidth.

FIG. 61 illustrates a GUI for a design for lithography system embeddedwithin a design for manufacturing system.

FIG. 62 illustrates a GUI for managing tools and tool recipes within adesign for lithography or design for manufacturing system.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In what follows, we describe approaches that are useful to identify andcorrect, in advance of lithographic mask creation, areas of anintegrated circuit (IC) that are likely to be problematic due tovariations in film thickness, surface topography uniformity, andelectrical impact that arise in the manufacture of an integratedcircuit. The identifications or corrections may be based on predicted ormodeled physical and electrical properties of a manufactured IC, arisingfrom dependencies between predefined circuit layout patterns and thecharacteristics of the processes used in the manufacture of theintegrated circuit.

These approaches are applicable to (a) high-density plasma (HDP) andchemical-mechanical polishing (CMP) processes used in the formation ofshallow trench isolation (STI) structures; (b) lithographic,high-density plasma (HDP), electroplated copper deposition (ECD), andchemical mechanical polishing (CMP) processes used in the formation ofsingle- and multi-level interconnect structures for integrated circuit(IC) devices; (c) processes and flows used to create oxide and low-kdielectric layers; (d) plasma-etch processes and the measurement ofcritical feature dimensions; (e) lithographic process flows that mayinclude pre and post photo resist deposition and removal steps and asubsequent plasma etch step used to physically etch the patternedfeatures into the wafer; (f) photoresist deposition and photoresistmaterial selection, (g) any step or steps in damascene process flows;and (h) computation of corrections to mask dimensions to achieve desiredcritical IC dimensions.

In fabricating integrated circuits, the degree of interconnect filmuniformity (in terms of both thickness and surface topography) isdependent on characteristics of circuit layout patterns (e.g. materialdensity, line widths, line spaces, and other feature dimensions).Surface and thickness non-uniformities often lead to subsequentmanufacturability and process integration issues. Pattern dependenciesoften cause processed films to have significant variation. The variationbecomes worse as subsequent non-conformal layers are deposited andpolished.

An integrated circuit (IC) typically includes multiple levels ofmaterials that have been deposited, planarized, and selectively etchedto reproduce circuitry defined by a computer-generated design.Lithography is a frequently repeated process step during the manufactureof ICs in which a pattern that defines the dimensions of the circuitryis transferred to a silicon wafer. The patterns are subsequently usedwith the etch process to physically etch the features into the wafersurface or other thin films deposited on the wafer surface. The termsfeature dimensions or feature size refer to dimensions of the geometrieswithin the circuit. Examples include: the width of a line, the spacingbetween structures (e.g. the spacing between two lines in an array oflines or a buffer distance between working circuitry and dummy fillstructures), the critical dimension (CD) of a circuit (i.e. the smallestdimension of any geometry in the circuit), widths of arrays of lines orother repeating structures, as well as the metrics (e.g. minimum,maximum, and average) on individual geometries or on groups ofgeometries (e.g. an array of lines). Feature dimensions may also includevertical and other dimensions, including sidewall angle, feature height(e.g. trench depth). Lithography equipment includes mechanisms (e.g.steppers) used to project images of patterns onto wafers and patterntransfer tools (e.g., masks and reticles) used to transfer circuitrypatterns onto wafers coated with a photosensitive film. Etch equipmentincludes mechanisms to selectively remove materials (e.g. oxide) from awafer surface or thin films on the wafer surface patterned withlithography equipment.

A basic projection lithography process is illustrated in FIG. 1. A lightsource (e.g., a lamp or laser) 10 is used to project light 12 through acondenser lens 14, which directs light through a mask or reticle 16 thatcontains a pattern that represents the printed circuit features. Thelight 12 then passes through a reduction lens, which focuses the imageonto a wafer 22. The minimum feature size that can be imaged can bedefined using the Rayleigh equations as:

$M_{fs} = {k_{1}\frac{\lambda}{NA}}$where λ is the exposing wavelength and NA is the numerical aperture ofthe optics. The parameter k₁, normally between 0.65 and 0.4 for deepultraviolet (DUV) imaging systems, is a process and system dependentvariable that includes effects such as resist, process improvements,light source, and reticle characteristics.

FIG. 2 describes the process of how a lithography mask may be createdfrom an IC design. A computer-aided-design (CAD) system 36 is used totranslate a functional circuit design to an electronic layout designfile that represents a physical device, layer-by-layer. The result is adesign layout that describes each level of the device from the lowestlevel, for example a transistor level, up to higher levels, for exampleinterconnect layers that transmit signals among transistors and supplypower to the components on the chip. The electronic design files areused during so-called tape-out to generate specifications for making amask 37. The masks are then manufactured 38 and used with thelithography tool to transfer circuit features to a wafer 39.

Many projection systems use step-and-repeat mechanisms that expose onlya sub-area of the wafer or a die, also referred to as the optical field,and then repeat the process until the entire wafer is imaged. Thestepper may be controlled to accommodate wafer-level variation thatoccurs across the wafer as a result of, for example, warp or bow. Thisis normally used to accommodate variability that occurs from die to die,but not variability that occurs within each die. To ensure that theprinted circuit is within a depth-of-focus associated with the optics,the stepper may adjust the focal length of the optics based onmeasurements of test keys or alignment marks, which are formed on asurface of the wafer, to accommodate variation in the thickness of thephotosensitive film or photoresist. Underlying film thickness variationin materials below the photoresist often causes the variation.

FIG. 3 illustrates that while the stepper can account for die-to-dievariation, it may not adequately address within-die variation caused byIC pattern dependencies. The reduction lens 18 of FIG. 1 is shown abovethe die surface 30 in FIG. 3. The projection system adjusts so that thefocal length 24 matches the measured distance to a test key or alignmentmark 26. The depth of focus 28 determines what features along theoptical axis can be reproduced with the desired resolution M_(fs) .Using the Rayleigh equations, depth of focus D_(f) 28 can be expressedas:

$D_{f} = {{\pm k_{2}}\frac{\lambda}{({NA})^{2}}}$where λ is the exposing wavelength and NA is the numerical aperture ofthe optics. The parameter k₂ (normally around one for deep ultravioletor DUV imaging systems) is a scaling factor based upon process relatedcharacteristics. During deposition of copper material via ECD or throughthe CMP of oxide or copper, for example, process related patterndependencies often cause within-die variation 30 across the chip. If thechip-level variation exceeds the depth of focus, then the printedfeatures 32 may not accurately represent the critical dimensions of theIC design as patterned on the mask and the errors, as imaged on thewafer, may negatively impact the performance of the device. As explainedbelow, it is possible to adapt the mask design so that the printed ICdimensions better match the designed dimensions.

The next few paragraphs describe the cause and result of process-relatedIC pattern dependencies.

The lithography process is repeated throughout the manufacture of asemiconductor device as each subsequent layer is created. One area wherethe techniques described here may be particularly helpful is during adamascene process in which metal lines, that connect device components(called interconnect), are created. Multiple layers of connections areused to transmit signals and power among device components.

The damascene process flow for a given interconnect layer is describedin FIG. 4. The flow begins with a post-CMP planarized surface 40 of theprior interconnect level (level N−1). A dielectric material (e.g. oxideor low-k material) is deposited 42 to electrically isolate the previousand current interconnect layers N−1 and N. (The dielectric forms what iscalled an inter-level dielectric or ILD layer. Although patterndependencies due to underlying features may require a CMP planarizationstep on the ILD, that step is optional and is not shown in this flowexample.) A photosensitive film (e.g. photoresist) is deposited on theILD wafer surface 44. A lithography system images the wafer 46 to definecircuit features for the current interconnect layer using a processsimilar to that illustrated in FIG. 1. A developer is used toselectively remove photoresist 48. Plasma etch is used to removeselective oxide areas 50 and the remaining photoresist is subsequentlyremoved 52. A barrier material is then deposited 54 and subsequently ECDis used to deposit metal, for example copper 56. CMP is used to polishaway selective copper areas and remove the barrier material 58. Thiscompletes the formation of metal interconnects for level N. Oftenpattern-related non-uniformity is transferred from underlying levels tooverlying interconnect levels resulting in variations in the ILD andphotoresist thickness that is imaged during lithography.

As described in FIG. 5, electroplated copper deposition (ECD) is aprocess step in a copper damascene flow that is used to deposit coppermaterial within the interconnect structures. The goal is to completelyfill an etched trench region in a void-free manner while minimizing avariation in the deposited copper thickness and minimizing a variationin surface topography. There exist pattern-dependencies in ECD thatresult in plated surface variation. FIG. 5 shows, for example, thedifference in post-plated thickness T_(diff 84) commonly observedbetween the deposited copper thickness T_(narrow) 70 that occurs overnarrow line widths 72 and the deposited copper thickness T_(wide) 82that occurs over a wide line width or trench 86.

Film thickness variation in chemical mechanical polishing (CMP)processes can be separated into various components: lot-to-lot,wafer-to-wafer, wafer-level, and die-level. Often, the most significantcomponent is the pattern dependent die-level component. Die-level filmthickness variation is often due to differences in layout patterns onthe chip. For example, in the CMP process, differences in the underlyingmetal pattern result in large long-range variation in the post CMP filmthickness, even though a locally planar surface topography is achieved.This variation occurs in copper, oxide, and shallow trench isolation(STI) CMP and is described in following figures.

For oxide polishing, the major source of variation is caused bywithin-die pattern density variation 102, shown as two groups of metallines in FIG. 6A. The metal lines 106 on the left side of FIG. 6A have alower density in the direction of the plane of the integrated circuitthan do the metal lines 108 on the right side of the figure. Patterndensity, in this case, is defined as the ratio of raised oxide area 110divided by the total area of the region. The region may be taken as asquare with the length of the sides equal to some length, for example,the planarization length. The planarization length is usually determinedby process factors such as the type of polishing pad, CMP tool, slurrychemistry, etc.

FIG. 7A illustrates an example of how the underlying feature densityaffects the film thickness variation. FIG. 7B plots the film thicknessvariation corresponding to each density type. For a given square areadefined by planarization length 132, the higher underlying featuredensity leads to larger film thickness variation 134. The lowerunderlying feature density leads to a reduced film thickness 135.Designers often try to maintain density tightly around 50% 133 topromote planarity. The effective pattern density may be computed foreach location on the die by filtering the designed layout densities,often by using various two-dimensional filters of densities around thegiven location. FIG. 6A illustrates how the underlying features 106 and108 cause variation in local surface topography (step height) 104 andglobal non-planarity 102.

In creating shallow trench isolation (STI) structures (examples areshown in FIG. 6B), SiO₂ 112 is deposited in a trench etched in silicon111 and planarized using CMP to electrically isolate devices. As withoxide inter-level dielectric (ILD) polishing, the underlying pattern ofisolated trenches results in unwanted variation in the deposited SiO₂.Problematic areas often are created as a result of CMP such as nitrideerosion 114 (where the nitride barrier is removed and possibly exposesthe underlying Si to contaminants and damage), corner rounding 116 andoxide dishing 118. The corner rounding has the effect of potentiallywidening the trench and where the exposure of Si 110 destroys thedevice. The oxide dishing results in topography variation that impactssubsequent lithography. In STI polishing, pattern density is animportant feature with regard to topographical variation and other CMPeffects.

FIG. 6C illustrates the effects of polishing metal features (e.g.,copper lines 122 and 126) entrenched in a dielectric (e.g., SiO₂) 120,during a damascene CMP process. For metal polishing, computation ofpattern density is important to characterizing full-chip patterndependencies; however determining other physical layout effects, such asthe line width and line space, may also be required. Two unwantedeffects known as dishing and erosion result from metal damascene CMP.Dishing 124 is measured as the difference in metal thickness at the edgeof a line and its center. Erosion 128 is defined as the difference inoxide thickness above a metal line, typically within an array of lines,to the oxide thickness in an adjacent unpatterned region. Anotherunwanted effect is residual copper 130 that is has not been removed fromdielectric field (or up areas) of the chip and remains on the waferafter polishing is complete. It is common for process engineers to setpolish times such that all residual copper is removed. For thosepatterned areas where copper is cleared first, dishing and erosioncontinue to occur, thereby increasing the non-uniformity of the wafersurface. Each of the described CMP processes contribute to surface levelnon-uniformity and thus may negatively impact lithography. While thetechniques described here are applicable to any process related patterndependencies, ECD and CMP are two processes that cause specific concernregarding non-uniformity. Although these processes will be used toillustrate the methods, the methods are applicable to patterndependencies related to any process.

The impact of process related pattern dependency on lithography isillustrated in FIG. 8. For the sake of clarity, the mask 184 and wafer192 are shown and the related optics are not shown. As a matter ofterminology used throughout, feature width (FW) is taken to be thesmallest dimension of any given object. This term encompasses varioustypes of layout objects, such as lines, rectangles, polygons, etc. Also,the critical dimension (CD) is understood to be the smallest dimensionof any feature on the layout, i.e. the smallest FW.

A mask 184 is shown with two features with the same feature width, (w),180 and 182 to be printed onto a wafer surface 192. When lithography isperformed, the within-die non-uniformity 192 due to process-relatedpattern dependencies (as illustrated in FIGS. 5, 6, and 7) may result ina film thickness difference (Δh) 186 across the chip between the twoprinted line widths w₂ 188 and w₁ 190. In this case 194, the printedline width w₁ 190 is much larger than w₂ 188. Although both line widths180 and 182 have been designed and created on the mask with the samedimensions, surface level non-uniformity may result in significantlydifferent dimensions in the printed features 188 and 190, whichsubsequently affects the performance of the manufactured IC.

Process related pattern-dependencies may also occur within thelithography process itself where the density of features often affecthow well the printed features reproduce those designed. In FIG. 9, amask 214 is shown with two sets of features: one with higher density 210and one with lower density 212. As features on the chip are placedcloser to each other (i.e. feature density increases), the diffractionpatterns associated with them change often resulting in a featuredimension that varies from that designed. Even with a perfectly planarwafer surface across the chip 216, the printed feature dimensions (e.g.line widths) (w+Δ1) 218 and (w+Δ2) 219 may vary 220 from the dimensionsdesigned and patterned on the mask.

Topographical variation may occur over all components within a chip andthus a full-chip characterization or prediction may be useful. In somecases, it is useful to focus on critical components or circuit areascall sub-networks or sub-nets. Within this context, full-chip predictionis meant to include any focus on topographical variation within acritical sub-net.

IC pattern dependent relationships can be used to verify whether featuredimensions produced by lithography match the dimensions as they weredesigned, and, if not, to modify the design layout and masks to yieldthe designed features. Lithography models may be combined with etchmodels to predict the physical feature dimensions created within thewafer. Electrical extraction and simulator components may also be usedto assess the electrical impact of variations in features (e.g. width,height, depth, sidewall angle) across the chip and fine-tune thespecified tolerances for the chip.

The following paragraphs describe an embodiment of the method, which isdepicted in FIG. 10A. Sub-blocks (310, 400, 600 and 800) within FIG. 10Awill be described in greater detail below.

An IC design is commonly represented electronically, e.g., in aGraphical Data Stream (GDS) format, in a library of files that definestructures and their locations at each level of an integrated circuit280. These files are typically large, although the features that arerelevant to process variation may be described more efficiently. Aprocess of layout extraction 310 involves summarizing discrete grids(sub-portions) of IC designs in a compact set of parameters such asfeature width, feature space, and density for each grid. Layoutextraction is not required but may be helpful where computationresources are constrained. A description of how to perform layoutextraction is described in section a below.

In the prediction component (P_(r)) 300, the layout features 280 of thedesign are mapped 310 to parameters of wafer topography (Δh) 580, suchas film thickness, dishing, erosion, and total copper loss. Thisinfomation may be used by a process model (e.g., a CMP model) or a setof process models M_(p) (e.g., ECD and a multi-step CMP process or amore complex process flow) 400 to predict or simulate the manufacturingresults and corresponding variation that will occur when the designrepresented by the layout features is manufactured on the modeledprocess. The variation of the resulting fabricated device can bemeasured physically, such as by optical measurement of the filmthickness or surface profiling of the wafer surface to determine actualtopography (e.g. dishing or step height and erosion or array height).The chip-level surface topography and associated electrical parameters580, relevant for comparison to the desired specifications 750, arecomputed for the full-chip, both within die and for multiple dies acrossthe wafer.

The predicted chip-level topography 580 is input into a lithographymodeling M_(L) step 600 that maps the variation in wafer surface height580 to the variation in printed feature dimensions 680 for theparticular lithography tool. This mapping may use the toolspecifications and equations for minimum feature size (M_(fs)) and depthof focus (D_(f)) to compute the feature dimension variation with respectto surface topography (as shown in FIG. 8) and an optical proximitycorrection tool (e.g., existing commercial versions) to compute thefeature dimension variation with regard to feature density (as shown inFIG. 9). Another approach is to utilize test wafers and a calibrationprocess described in FIGS. 36A and 36B and section f. to capture patterndependencies with regard to surface topography and feature density. Theresult of these approaches is the predicted variation in featuredimensions and line widths across the full-chip 680 for one or multipledies across a wafer that has been processed using lithography process orflow 680.

One option is to use models in which the lithography process flow 600 isdefined to include not only the lithography process step but may alsoinclude pre and post photoresist deposition and subsequent plasma etch.This may be useful if the actual physical feature dimensions aredesired, as an alternative to the patterned feature dimensions thatlithography models alone provide. It is recommended to use a patterndependent etch model that provides additional feature dimensions such assidewall angle and trench profiles. This step concludes the predictioncomponent P_(r) 300.

The predicted feature dimension variation 680 and the desired featuredimension specification and tolerances 750 are input into a verificationand correction component 800 which identifies any features that willexceed or approach the tolerances. This component also may be used tocorrect the dimensions of the identified features within the designlayout and in subsequent mask creation so as to achieve the designed (ordesired) feature dimensions across the chip. Once these modificationsare made to the IC design, dummy fill may be reinserted or adjusted anda new layout generated.

Dummy fill is a method of improving film thickness uniformity inintegrated circuits through the addition of the structures or theremoval of existing structures. Adding metal dummy fill increases thepattern density since density is defined as the amount of metal dividedby the total area within a given region. Conversely, adding oxide dummy(also called slotting) removes sections of the copper line and decreasesthe pattern density. The addition of fill can also alter otherparameters such as line width and line space. If dummy metal is insertedbetween two parallel lines, the line space changes for both of thoselines. Similarly, if oxide dummy is inserted within a wire, itseffective line width is changed. By modifying the existing layoutthrough the addition of dummy fill, physical parameters such as patterndensity, line width, and line space are changed.

The new layout is then input into the prediction component to ensurethat the new design meets not only the lithography related featuredimension requirements but also the design and electrical rules andspecifications as well. This will likely be an iterative process untilthe criteria are met across all concerns.

FIG. 10A describes the basic flow for design verification and for maskcorrection. FIGS. 10B and 10C provide more detailed flows for designverification and mask correction, respectively. The motivation behinddesign verification is to predict feature width and topographicalvariations and to use electrical simulations to verify that a givendesign meets the desired criteria. As such, it is important to modifythe design file to reflect the feature dimensions that will result foreach interconnect level. As shown in FIG. 10B, the first step is togenerate the layout for an interconnect level (e.g. level N). Thefull-clip design, a critical sub-portion of the circuit design or anextraction from the layout is used to predict feature width variation222 due to the lithography (and optionally, plasma etch as well)process. This is similar to the prediction component 300 shown in FIG.10A. The original design file is stored 223 for future use because ifthe design passes verification, the original design will be used tocreate the masks. A temporary design file is modified 224 to reflect thefeature width variation that will result from the lithography (andoptionally, the plasma etch) process. The electrical impact of featurewidth variation can be evaluated 225 by performing full-chip or criticalcircuit network simulation using resistance-capacitance (RC) extractionand other electrical simulation tools. This allows for examination ofissues, related to interconnect feature width variation such as couplingcapacitance, noise and timing. The physical characteristics (e.g. totalcopper loss, dishing and erosion) and electrical characteristics (e.g.sheet rho variation, timing closure, signal integrity, power grid andoverall performance) are checked 226 against specifications for thedevice. The verification step weighs the results and either passes orrejects this design level. If the design passes, the original designfile is used for mask creation 228. If the design is rejected or failsto pass, both the feature width and topographical variation results areprovided to the designer or may be input into a design or maskcorrection component 229, such as the mask correction approach describedhere. Approaches for both design verification and mask correctioncomponents are described in Section e.

A mask correction technique is shown in FIG. 10C and may be integratedwith an electronic design automation (EDA) tool (as shown in FIGS. 54and 55) or used separately (FIG. 56). The first step is generate thelayout for an interconnect level (e.g. level N) 231. The layout isnormally generated using an EDA tool that places circuit components androutes wiring for interconnect levels. Often dummy fill is added 232 topromote uniformity. The dummy fill may be performed at this stage orperformed during the prediction step in 235 when the topographicalvariation due to pattern dependencies is computed. The next step 233 isphysical verification in which the design is checked to make sure thatit meets all the design rules and parameters that are specified bymanufacturing (e.g., a foundry). Physical verification is often part ofthe normal EDA tool flow that includes steps 231, 232, 233 andelectrical simulation 234. Normally optical proximity correction (OPC)is done, as part of physical verification, to adapt features tocompensate for sub-wavelength distortions. However it is recommendedthat this component be made inactive in any design flow and that OPCmethods be used in step 235 instead. If both are used, then the designis adapted for mask creation before the topographical effects onlithography can be properly evaluated. The next recommended step iselectrical simulation, which is used to verify that the feature widths,as designed, meet the electrical specifications 234. The full-chipdesign, a sub-network of the circuit or an extraction from the designlayout is then input into the feature width prediction component thatcharacterizes the impact of pattern dependencies on the lithographyprocess (and optionally, the etch process as well) 235. This is similarto the prediction component 300 shown in FIG. 10A. Optical proximitycorrection (OPC) 236 may be performed within the prediction step, asshown in 640 FIG. 22A, or separately, as shown in 236, using an existingcommercial tool. The next step is correction 237 where the design fileis modified so that the mask features compensate for width variation. Itis recommended that any modifications to the design files 237 by thesecomponents (235 and 236) be coordinated. These steps may be repeated 230for each interconnect level until the highest interconnect level isreached. When modifications to design files, to be used for masktape-out for each interconnect level, are complete, the electronic filesare sent out for creating the masks. It is important to maintainseparate design files though. The design files that have been modifiedto compensate for the width variation are only useful for mask creation.The masks if properly modified will result in feature dimensions thatclosely resemble those designed in the original design files. As such,any further simulation or analysis should use the original design files,whose dimensions will be accurately represented in the manufacturedcircuit.

Two examples of how the techniques may be applied to damascene processflows are provided in FIGS. 11 and 12, which will be referred to asmodes A and B respectively. The damascene process flow is a good examplebecause non-uniformity may propagate from level 1 to level 2 and so onuntil the final level N is reached, and the following figures illustratethe iterative nature of the approach. To simplify the process flowdescriptions, pre and post wafer treatments that do not significantlyaffect wafer topography are ignored. Also, to simplify the example to ageneric damascene flow, the term interconnect level is used as a globalreference to include both metal and via levels; any additional oxidedeposition or etch steps to form vias are not shown. The damascene flowsillustrated can be easily extended to dual-damascene and other damasceneprocess flows. Also, the process flows shown in FIGS. 11 and 12 are forthe case where plasma etch is not included in the lithography processmodule 600 and is computed separately. If the option to predict etchedor physically created feature dimensions is used, the etch model 250 isused within a lithography process flow component 600 before comparison246 or modification 260.

The difference between the two approaches is that in mode A, the designis modified before mask creation and tape-out to produce the desireddimensions and thus the original design and extraction reflect theactual printed circuit dimensions (if one uses the corrections to themask to produce the originally designed features). The layout extractionfor the original design still reflects the processed feature dimensionsor may be close enough to assume the designed widths are used insubsequent ECD process steps.

In mode B, the design is modified to reflect the impact of widthvariation due to lithography. The variation in feature dimensions ateach level needs to be reflected in subsequent steps that have patterndependencies. As such, the design file is adapted, another layoutextraction may be performed and the variation is propagated to the nextinterconnect level to examine multi-layer effects.

Mode A is oriented toward mask correction to yield minimal feature sizevariation. Mode B is useful for characterizing lithography processimpact, for a given design, within the flow. This is also useful indetermining measurement plans for feature dimension variationimpact—perhaps for existing production device flows where the masks havealready been made and being used in production. As such, the full-chipfeature dimension variation has to be taken into consideration forsubsequent process impact and the design appropriately modified togenerate a new layout extraction for downstream process prediction. Alsoif the full physical and electrical impact of lithography variation isto be examined the changes to feature dimensions should be modifiedbefore simulation (perhaps using RC extractor or EDA tool) as well. Thatallows for the electrical impact of lithography variation to becharacterized as well.

FIG. 11 describes mode A in which the design is modified to yieldminimal feature dimension variation after each lithography prediction.Please note that further details on each step will be provided insubsequent sections and these descriptions are to indicate the flow andoperation of the components in FIG. 10.

The sample application begins with interconnect level 1 , the layout isgenerated 280 for levels 1 through the final level N, the process modelcomponent 401 is used to extract layout parameters 240, and the ILDprocess model 242 is used to predict the full-chip dielectric thickness,also referred to as Δh in FIG. 10. The lithography model component 600is used to predict the feature dimension variation ΔFW. One option is toimport feature width variation to electrical simulation tools tocharacterize the electrical impact and transfer the electricalcharacterization of feature width variation to the verificationcomponent 246 as well.

The verification component 246 compares the prediction andspecifications and identifies problematic areas. The correctioncomponent 248 modifies the design so that the lithography process yieldsthe desired feature dimension levels. Since the printed features nowmatch (or are sufficiently close within some acceptable threshold) theoriginal layout extraction parameters 240, a new layout extraction isprobably not required unless the feature specifications have been settoo broad. This is a way in which the techniques may be used to modifydesign rules to be less conservative, once lithography variation hasbeen minimized.

To generate the lithography prediction for interconnect level 2, theunderlying topography for all the process steps between the twolithography steps should be addressed. To compute the incoming wafertopography Δh for level 2, the prediction component M_(p) Level 2 402must use the predicted ILD topography from 242, the etch modelprediction 250, the ECD model predicted wafer topography, and the CMPmodel predicted topography 252 from interconnect level 1 and thesubsequent ILD topography 256 from interconnect level 2. The patternthat is imaged during interconnect level 2 lithography is the level 2design, which is extracted 254 and input into the lithography model.Finally, the feed-forward propagation through the model flow yields theincoming topographical variation 256 that is input into the lithographymodel along with the level 2 extraction parameters 254 for predictingthe interconnect level 2 feature variation 600.

One option for the use outlined in FIG. 11 is to transfer feature widthvariation computed in 600 and 250 and the topographical variationcomputed in 252 into electrical simulations to characterize theelectrical performance for interconnect level 1 and this may be repeatedfor each interconnect level.

FIG. 12 describes mode B. The mode B approach may be used to determinethe impact of chip and wafer level pattern dependencies on thelithography process for multiple interconnect levels or the entire chip.In this approach, the printed or etched feature dimensions that resultfrom a lithography process flow may not be the same as the desiredfeature dimensions and as such any pattern dependencies in subsequentprocess steps would be based on the printed or etched dimensions. Giventhat circuit dimensions may be significantly different, it isrecommended that the design or extraction be updated to the predictedvariation. When the design is updated to reflect the variation, anotherextraction may need to be performed and forwarded to subsequent modelprediction steps. Further details on each step will be provided insubsequent sections and this description is to indicate the flow andoperation of the components in FIG. 10. The key difference in the stepsdescribed in FIG. 11 and FIG. 12 is that in FIG. 12 the lithographymodel prediction of feature dimension variation 600 is used to modifythe layout 260 so that it accurately represents the full-chip printedfeature width that will actually be printed on the wafer surface. Theexisting extraction may be modified or a new extraction 262 may be runand fed into the subsequent etch process step 250. In the option whereetch models are used within lithography process flow in 600, theresulting variation in features are used to update the layout and a newextraction is ran and fed into the subsequent ECD step 252. Theverification, mode B, operation may be used with existing process flowsto determine measurement and sampling plans to measure problematic areaswhere feature dimension variation is a concern.

An option for the method in FIG. 10 is to add an electrical extractionor simulation component to predict the resistance, capacitance andoverall electrical impact of the feature dimension variation thatresults from lithography a lithography process flow including etch. Onemay also use this invention for full interconnect level electricalcharacterization by combining predicted feature width and topographicalvariation that occurs subsequent ECD or CMP steps and providing thisinformation to electrical extraction or simulation tools.

To evaluate electrical impact in FIG. 11, the feature width variationcomputed in 600 and the topographical variation computed in subsequentprocess steps 252 may be imported into electrical simulations tocharacterize the electrical performance for interconnect level 1 andthis may be repeated for each interconnect level.

To evaluate electrical impact in FIG. 12, the feature width variationcomputed in 600 may be examined and transferred to the verificationcomponent in 246 and 250 and the topographical variation computed in 252may be imported into electrical simulations to characterize theelectrical performance for interconnect level 1 and this may be repeatedfor each interconnect level.

In the final verification pass for a given IC design a combination ofboth process models and electrical simulations may be used to gauge theperformance of a given IC design and compare the prediction against thedesired wafer quality and electrical parameters as well as design rulecriteria 800.

Illustrative embodiments are described in the following sections:Section a. describes the layout generation process. Section b. describesthe extraction of layout parameters related to process variation as amethod to transform the large design files into a manageable set offeatures. Layout extraction is not required but is useful. Section c.describes a desirable use of process and electrical models tocharacterize the impact of pattern dependencies and process variation onchip-level topography. Section d. describes the mapping of wafertopography and designed (or desired) circuit features to predictedfeature dimension variation that results from a lithography processflow. Section e. describes the verification process of comparingpredicted and desired feature dimension values across the full-chip anda correction process for modifying design features and generating newGDS design files for mask tape-out and creation. Section f. describesthe creation and use of test wafers to characterize pattern dependenciesassociated with lithography process flows. Section g. describesapplications using the procedures described in sections b. through f.Section h. describes the construction and computational framework usedto implement the methods and the applications described in Section g.,as well as the operation of the system and methods by users.

a. Layout Generation

Depending on how the techniques is used (for example, as shown in 10B or10C), the lithography prediction may be used within an EDA design flow,as shown in FIG. 55, or in series with an EDA design flow, as shown inFIG. 56.

In both FIG. 11 and FIG. 12, the lithography modeling may come before orafter the layout extraction component. Generally, layout design filesare sent through an OPC correction step resulting in the creation of apost OPC layout design file. The OPC correction may either be rule basedor model based, but in either case the layout design file is modifiedfrom its original form in order that the lines actually printed on thewafer surface after passing through the optics of the lithographyprocess most closely represent what was originally intended. In FIG.29C, verification is performed at the designed feature resolution and noabstraction of the features, using layout extraction, is needed. Assuch, this is a case where lithography variation is characterized andperhaps corrected at the feature dimension resolution.

The layout extraction component must be performed on a pre OPC designfile and account for any possible errors that the OPC correction mayfail to account for, or, if the layout extraction is performed on thepost OPC design file, it must remove the effects of the OPC correctionin order that it most closely represents what will actually be printedon the wafer surface.

If one is to utilize the lithography model component for OPC and rely onits ability to change the GDS design file such that you get what isdesigned into the GDS file, then modifications based on topographyvariations due to CMP may also be moved up above the lithographymodeling/OPC block.

In other words, if the techniques are integrated within an EDA tool, anymodification of feature widths are to be made before OPC, so that theOPC tool could insert and adjust changes to the GDS file (in it normaloperating fashion). Alternatively, the topographical variations (Δh)could just be forwarded into the OPC tool and it could adjust for boththe surface variations and the optical proximity. All of these areoptions, depending on how the techniques are to be used and whether itis used with an EDA tool and OPC component or not.

Two such ways of generating process layouts (or electronic design files)are described in FIG. 13A and FIG. 13B. FIG. 13A describes a method ofcorrecting masks for a layout generated in a design flow, typicallyperformed using an EDA tool. Layout generation 280 describes the processthat converts a functional circuit design to a layout. An IC design iscommonly represented electronically in a layout design file (e.g., in aGraphical Data Stream or GDS format) in a library of files that definestructures and their locations at each level of an integrated circuit.The process begins with a layout of where major components (blocks ofcircuitry) are located on the physical die 282. Place and route 284 isthen done to determine precisely where every cell or block is positionedand how all components are connected. Dummy fill addition 286 may beperformed to modify the density of materials in a given layer, whileminimizing the electrical impact (Additional information concerningdummy fill is set forth in U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/165,214,10/164,844, 10/164,847, and 10/164,842, all filed Jun. 7, 2002). Dummyfill may also be performed later after topographical variation ischaracterized as part of the prediction component 300. The next step 288is physical verification in which the design is checked to make surethat it meets all the design rules and parameters that are specified bymanufacturing (e.g., a foundry).

A common option, during or after the physical verification step in adesign flow, is to pass the design through optical proximity correction(OPC) to adapt the design file used to create masks with regard tofeature density. Within the methods described here, the step may beperformed in the lithography modeling component 600 so thatmanufacturing variation may be taken into account along with featuredensity.

Often electrical extraction and simulation are performed 290 to verifythat the chip, as verified in the prior step and with dummy fill added,meets electrical performance requirements. Within the context of themethods described here, electrical impact also includes full-chipprediction of sheet resistance, total copper loss, capacitance, drivecurrent and timing closure parameters.

The design modifications are generated in a layout design file formatand assembled into a library. To achieve a smaller electronic file size,a hierarchical method may be used to compress the size of the designfiles (Such a hierarchical method is described in U.S. patentapplication Ser. Nos. 10/165,214, 10/164,844, 10/164,847, and10/164,842, all filed Jun. 7, 2002.). Once layout generation iscompleted, the design may be input into the layout extraction component310. The layout extraction, the actual full-chip design at the featureresolution or some portion of the circuit such as a critical network isfed into the prediction component 300.

The layout generation process described in FIG. 13B the generation andverification of a design. The components are the same as described inFIG. 13A and the prior paragraphs in this section. However the order isdifferent so that the physical and electrical impact of feature widthvariation may be inserted into the design process directly. The processin FIG. 13B is similar to that of FIG. 13A in that it begins with alayout of where major components (blocks of circuitry) are located onthe physical die 282. Place and route 284 is then done to determineprecisely where every cell or block is positioned and how all componentsare connected. Dummy fill addition 286 may be performed to modify thedensity of materials in a given layer, while minimizing the electricalimpact (Additional information concerning dummy fill is set forth inU.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/165,214, 10/164,844, 10/164,847,and 10/164,842, all filed Jun. 7, 2002). Dummy fill may also beperformed later after topographical variation is characterized as partof the prediction component 300. The next step 288 is physicalverification in which the design is checked to make sure that it meetsall the design rules and parameters that are specified by manufacturing(e.g., a foundry).

In this mode, the techniques described here work with the physicalverification component and may, as shown later in FIG. 54 and FIG. 55,be directly embedded or integrated within a physical verificationcomponent within an EDA tool. In some cases where the computationalburden is a constraint, a layout extraction may be performed (describedin more detail in Section b.) 310. In other cases, the actual designfile or some portion of the circuit (e.g. a critical sub-network) may bedirectly imported into the physical verification 288 and predictioncomponents 300.

The prediction component examines and characterizes feature widthvariation 300 and updates a design file, which reflects the variation inmanufactured circuit if the masks use the original layout produced in280. The electrical impact of this variation on circuit performance maybe evaluated by using electrical extractions and simulations that areperformed 290 to verify that the chip meets electrical performancerequirements. Within the context of the methods described here,electrical impact also includes full-chip prediction of sheetresistance, total copper loss, capacitance, drive current and timingclosure parameters. The overall impact of feature width variation onphysical and electrical characteristics for the interconnect level areevaluated against desired device specifications.

In later figures and descriptions, layout generation will indicated witha ‘L’ and may include any and all of the cases discussed in this sectionbut is not limited to the two cases described in FIG. 13A and FIG. 13B.

b. Layout Parameter Extraction

As described in section a., a layout is a set of electronic files thatstore the spatial locations of structures and geometries that compriseeach layer of an integrated circuit. It is known that variation duringmanufacturing, which negatively impacts the chip-level planarity ofprocessed films, is related to the variation in spatial densities andthe spatial distribution of features within a given design. Thisrelationship may be characterized using layout extraction, in whichcharacteristics of the feature layout (e.g. width and spaces of linesand pattern density) are extracted spatially across a chip from thegeometric descriptions in layout files. The extracted information maythen be used to determine areas of the chip that exceed design rulecriteria, such as limits on feature dimensions and distances toneighboring structures.

The layout parameter most often used to compute dummy fill is theeffective pattern density. Although the dummy fill method works withextracted densities, it is useful to include the extracted featurewidths and spaces. Since lithography impact must take into considerationall features, whether electrically active or dummy structures, it isrecommended to use designs with dummy fill added and the associatedlayout parameters for purposes of layout extraction.

The flowchart in FIGS. 14A, 14B and 14C provides a detailed flow of thelayout extraction component 310 of FIG. 10. The layout file istransferred or uploaded to the computer where the extraction algorithmis running 311. The layout is divided into discrete grids, small enoughso that aggregate computations of mean, maximum, and minimum featurescan be used to represent the structures in the grid and still allowaccurate feature representation 312. The trade-off is between higher andlower grid resolution is the increased extraction, calibration, andprediction compute times versus a more faithful representation of thelayout and more accurate predictions. It is recommended to use a gridsize that is less than feature dimensions; however section e. and FIG.29A presents a method for using larger grid sizes such as 40 μm×40 μmfor verification and correction. The grids are ordered or queued forprocessing 313. One desirable approach is to use multiple processors tocompute the grids in parallel 314. A grid is selected 315 and withinthat grid the width of each object 316 is computed 317. This process isrepeated for every object within that grid 318. For each set ofneighboring objects (e.g. adjacent objects or objects within somedefined distance of an object in being processed) the maximum, minimum,and mean space is computed 319. The effective density for the entiregrid is then computed 320. This process is repeated for all theremaining grids 321. Once all the grids are processed, the extractedfeatures such as width, space, and density are reassembled from theparallel processors 322.

A table is then created and the maximum, minimum, and mean width, space,and density for each grid are placed in it as well as the maximum,minimum, and mean width for the whole chip 323. The minimum and maximumwidths for the whole chip are used to compute a range.

Bins are useful for computing statistical and probabilisticdistributions for layout parameters within the range specified by thebin. The width range (M) for the chip is divided by a number of desiredbins (N) 324 to determine the relative size of each of the N bins. Forexample, the first bin would span from the minimum width or smallnonzero value Δ to the width (M/N). Successive bins would be definedsimilarly up to the N^(th) bin, which will span the width from minFW_(BinN)=(N−1)·(M/N) to max FW_(BinN)=(N)·(M/N) which is also themaximum feature width. The limits for each of these bins may also be setmanually by the user. There are three sets of bins, a set of bins foreach of maximum, minimum, and mean width. Each grid is placed in theappropriate bins according to its max, min, and mean width 325. Ahistogram is also created for each bin showing the distribution ofvalues within that bin 326. This information is stored in the databaseand fed into process models 327.

The maximum, minimum, and mean feature space ranges are computed for thefull chip 328. The space range (M) is divided by the number of desiredbins (N) 329 to determine the relative size of each of the N bins. Forexample, the first bin would span from the minimum space or smallnonzero value Δ to the space (M/N) and successive bins would be definedsimilarly up to the N^(th) bin, which will span the space from minFS_(BinN)=(N−1)·(M/N) to max FS_(BinN)=(N)·(M/N), which is also themaximum space. The limits for these bins may also be set manually by theuser. There are three sets of bins, a set of bins for each of maximum,minimum, and mean feature space for the full chip. Each grid isseparated into the appropriate bins according to its max, min, and meanspace 330. A histogram is also created for each bin showing thedistribution of values within that bin 331. This information is storedin the database and fed into process models.

The density range is computed for the full chip 333. The density range(M) is divided by the number of desired bins (N) 334 to determine therelative size of each of the N bins. For example the first bin wouldrange from the minimum density or small nonzero value Δ to the densityvalue (M/N) and other bins would be defined similarly up to the Nth binwhich will span the density from min FD_(BinN)=(N−1)·(M/N)+Δ to maxFD_(BinN)=(N)·(M/N), which is also the maximum density. The limits forthese bins may also be set manually by the user. There is one set ofbins for density. Each grid is assigned to the appropriate binsaccording to its density 335. A histogram is also created for each binshowing the distribution of values within that bin 336. This informationis stored in the database and fed into process models 337. Finally allthe width, space, and density information 338 are stored either in thedatabase or on the file system for later use in process model prediction400, 600, and 800.

FIG. 15 provides an illustration of how an extraction table 362 (for allthe grids across the full-chip or die) is generated using the processdescribed in FIGS. 14A, 14B and 14C. The chip or die 360 is segmentedinto discrete grids 364 and the extraction procedure, described in FIG.13, is used to compute the width 47 space 48, and density 49 for eachgrid element 46. For each discrete grid on the die 364 there exists afeature in the extraction table for the grid coordinates 366 with therelevant pattern dependent characteristics, for example density, featurewidth (FW), and feature space (FS). The figure also shows an example oftwo grids with (x, y) coordinates (1,1) 376 and (2,1) 378 and how theymay appear in the extraction table. FIG. 13 indicates how thesecharacteristics, feature width (FW) 368, feature space (FS) 370, anddensity 372 values, may be placed in an extraction table 362. In manycases, the max, min and mean of the features within each grid are storedin the table as well.

c. Pattern-Dependent Process Models

A process model or a series of models (e.g., a model of a flow) can beused to predict the manufactured variation in physical and electricalparameters of an actual IC device from an IC design. By characterizingthe process variation relative to IC structures using the model,variations in topography across the chip may be predicted and used toestimate printed feature size variation during lithography or physicalfeature dimensions that result from use of lithography and etchprocessing.

As described in FIG. 16, pattern-dependent process models and modelflows 540 are used to map extracted IC patterns and characteristics 310to chip-level topographic variation across the chip 580. Each processtool generally has unique characteristics and thus a model typicallyneeds to be calibrated to a particular recipe and tool 500. As such, thepattern-dependent model component 400 includes the calibration step 500and the feed-forward prediction step 540. Full-chip or partial chippredictions may include copper thickness, dishing, erosion or electricalimpact of topographical variation. The following paragraphs describe thecalibration step 500.

It is common practice to physically process integrated circuits inaccordance with a given IC design to determine the impact of processingon physical and electrical parameters and to develop or calibrateprocess models specific to a particular tool or recipe, as shown in FIG.17A. In the calibration process 500 shown in FIG. 17A, the actualproduct wafer 464 is processed using a recipe 465 on a particular tool466. Pre-process wafer measurements 467 and post-process wafermeasurements 468 are used to fit model parameters 469. A semi-empiricalmodel is used to characterize pattern dependencies in the given process.The calibration model parameters or fitting parameters 470 may beextracted using any number of computational methods such as regression,nonlinear optimization or learning algorithms (e.g. neural networks).The result is a model that is calibrated to the particular tool for agiven recipe 471. In other words, it is a model that, for the particulartool and recipe, is useful in predicting the characteristics of finishedICs that are processed according to a particular chip design.

Certain IC characteristics, such as feature density, width, and spacingare directly related to variation in topography for plating, deposition,and CMP processes. Test wafers that vary these features throughout somerange across the die can be used to build a mapping firm designparameters (e.g. width, space, density) to manufacturing variation (e.g.film thickness, total copper loss, dishing and erosion) for a given tooland recipe. Test wafers are an attractive alternative for assessingprocess impact than actual designed wafers because they are generallyless expensive to manufacture and one test wafer design can be used tocharacterize any number of processes or recipes for a wide range of ICdesigns. As shown in FIG. 17B, a test wafer 390 can be also be used togenerate a calibrated process model or multiple process models or aprocess flow. The calibration model parameters may be computed similarlyto the method shown in FIG. 17A. One difference is that the pre-processmeasurement, 474, may be conducted by the test wafer manufacturer andretrieved in an electronic form, such as via the internet, email, discor CD, or in paper form. Another difference is that the resultingcalibration 478 normally spans a much larger range of feature width,spacing, and density, and thus is more applicable to a broad range ofdevices that could be fabricated on the tool using the recipe. Since atest wafer is normally designed to span a large design space, thecalibration process described in FIG. 17B is recommended.

More details regarding the use of test wafers in calibrating a processare provided in FIG. 18. A test wafer die 479 is patterned with a rangeof line width and line space values 480. The test wafer is processed(e.g., by CMP, ECD, or deposition) on a particular tool using a givenrecipe 481 and the resulting variation in a parameter is measured acrossthe chip 483 using a metrology tool (e.g. film thickness, 484). Thismapping 482, dictated by the calibration model parameters, may beconsidered a model that maps a wide range of line width and line spacevalues to a particular film thickness variation for this tool andrecipe.

These mappings are useful for predicting process variation for new ICdesigns, as shown in FIG. 19A. Feature widths and spaces that fallwithin the range 486 spanned by the test die and wafer are extracted 485from a new IC layout. The extracted feature widths and spaces forspatial locations across the chip 486 are input into the mapping 487 andan accurate prediction of film thickness variation across the chip 489and 490 can be acquired for a given tool and a given recipe beforeprocessing of the new IC design.

As shown in FIG. 19B, the predicted process variation 491 (which mayinclude variation due to lithography) can be fed into electrical modelsor simulations 492 to assess the impact of processing on the electricalperformance of the chip 493. Some of the electrical parameters that maybe computed using the models include variation in sheet resistance, lineresistance, capacitance, interconnect RC delay, voltage drop, drivecurrent loss, dielectric constant, signal integrity, IR drop orcross-talk noise. These predictions can be used to determine the impactof feature dimension variation on electrical performance for thefull-chip or critical networks (also called critical nets).

The following paragraphs and figure descriptions provide a detailed flowof the use of process and electrical models to characterize variation,as implemented for lithography.

FIG. 20 describes the steps involved in calibrating a process model to aparticular tool or recipe. Layout extraction 310 parameters arecomputed, or in the case of test wafers, uploaded from the waferprovider. The second step 501 pre-measures the wafer using metrologyequipment. These measurements may include film thickness andprofilometry scans to acquire array and step heights. The test wafer isprocessed 502 using the particular process or process flow that is to becharacterized. Such processes or flows may include plating, deposition,and/or polishing steps. It is particularly useful to calibrate onindividual processes and also to calibrate on sections of the flow as away to capture any coupling of variation between subsequent processsteps in a flow. It is also recommended to calibrate the model fordifferent recipe parameters such as time. The processed wafers aremeasured 503 at the same locations as the pre-measurements; suchmeasurements may include film thickness, profilometry, or electricalcharacteristics; and the variation for the given process may becharacterized 504. Process models or representations are uploaded in 505and the pre and post measurements as well as computed variation may beused to calibrate or fit the model or representation to a particulartool and/or recipe or recipes. These models may be formulated anduploaded by a user or selected from a library of models on a modelingcomputer system. The pre- and post-processing measurements and computedprocess variation are used to fit the model or simulation parameters forthe given tool and recipe 506. The result 507 is a process modelcalibrated to a particular tool and recipe or recipes. The result mayalso include a series of calibrated process models that can be used tosimulate a process flow The calibration model parameters for specificmodels (e.g. ECD, etch, and CMP), tools, recipes and flows are loadedinto the database and into the models during feed-forward prediction520.

The steps that constitute the feed-forward prediction component 540 aredescribed in FIG. 21A. A damascene process flow for predictingpre-lithography wafer topography is used to illustrate how a predictionmay work but any process flow or single process step may be substituted.To simplify the process flow descriptions, pre- and post-processingwafer treatments that do not significantly affect wafer topography areignored. Also to simplify the example to a generic damascene flow, theterm interconnect level is used as a global reference to include bothmetal and via levels. Any additional oxide deposition or etch steps toform vias are not shown. The damascene flows illustrated can be easilyextended to dual-damascene and other damascene process flows.

The extraction 310 is loaded into the prediction component 540. Theprediction component then retrieves the incoming wafer topography 542.For interconnect levels greater than 1, this is the last process stepfrom the prior interconnect level. For the first interconnect level,either the incoming wafer topography can be predicted using patterndependent modeling of component creation or initialized to planar.

Both the incoming topography and extracted parameters are loaded into anILD process model to predict the resulting wafer surface 544. ILDdeposition models may include the use of oxide (SiO₂) or low-k material.It is recommended to include pattern-dependencies to acquire full-chipprediction, particularly when oxide CMP is inserted to planarize the ILDlayer. As such, pattern-dependent oxide deposition and oxide CMP modelsmay be used and may require the loading of model calibration parameters520. The use of the prediction component in this manner may alsofacilitate the introduction of low-k materials into a damascene processflow. The result of this step is a prediction of the final ILD thickness546.

Depending on whether the prediction is part of mode A (FIG. 11) or modeB (FIG. 12) the flow has an option 548. In mode A 552, any featuredimension variation outside of the specification for level 1 has beenused to modify the design such that the printed feature dimension forlevel 1 matches that of the design. So for mode A, the ILD thickness 546can be fed directly into the etch model 566 on FIG. 21C.

In mode B 550, the feature size variation that results from thelithography step needs to be used to update the layout extraction to theproper feature variation that downstream processes will receive. In thismode, the incoming wafer topography and layout parameters are loadedinto the lithography model 554. It is recommended to includepattern-dependencies in the lithography model to acquire full-chipprediction and as such, model calibration parameters may be required andloaded 520. The feature size variation 556 is predicted and used toadjust layout features, shrink or bloat features, to accuratelyrepresent the result of lithography 558. The layout is generated 560 andused to generate a new extraction 562 that more accurately representsthe effects of litho-based feature dimension variation. The newextraction 564 is fed forward to the etch process step 566. For anN-level interconnect process flow prediction in model B, this step willbe repeated for each lithography step so that the full impact of featuredimension variation may be observed at level N.

The ILD thickness from the prior step 566 and the layout parameters areloaded into an etch model. It is recommended to includepattern-dependencies in the etch model to acquire full-chip predictionand as such, model calibration parameters may be required and loaded520. The etch model predicts final wafer topography 568, which, alongwith the layout parameters, is loaded into an ECD model 570. It isrecommended to include pattern-dependencies in the ECD model 570 toacquire full-chip prediction and as such, model calibration parametersmay be required and loaded 520. The result of this step is a full-chipprediction of wafer topography after plating 572. Some processes mayalso use an electrical chemical mechanical deposition (ECMD) stepinstead and the use of pattern dependent models is recommended.

The incoming wafer topography resulting from ECD and extractionparameters are loaded into the CMP process model or models 574. CMP in adamascene process may be performed over a number of process steps. Atypical example is when a bulk CMP step is used to remove most of thecopper, a touchdown or endpoint polish is then done to slowly clear allthe copper from the field areas without significant dishing and erosionof features and finally a barrier polish is performed to remove thebarrier material. It is recommended to include pattern-dependencies inthe CMP model to acquire full-chip prediction and as such, modelcalibration parameters may be required and loaded 520. The final wafertopography that results from the CMP step or flow is generated 575. Someof the wafer topography characteristics may include thickness, surfaceprofile, dishing and erosion.

An optional step may be to include electrical extraction or performanceanalysis for the current, completed interconnects level 576. Electricalcharacteristics that may be predicted from the full-chip CMP predictioninclude sheet resistance, capacitance, drive current, and, when multipleinterconnect levels are considered, timing closure analysis. This stepmay be useful when verification is done to analyze the impact oflithography-based feature dimension variation on IC performance. Oftenfeature dimension tolerances or specifications may not provide the levelof resolution necessary to properly gauge the impact of featuredimension variation and this might be one way to gain a bettercharacterization.

While the CMP step is the last physical process step in the priorinterconnect level (e.g. level 1), the ILD deposition for the currentinterconnect level (e.g. level 2) needs to be predicted to acquire thewafer surface topography used in lithography prediction for the currentinterconnect level (e.g. level 2). Wafer topography and extractedparameters are loaded into the ILD process model to predict theresulting wafer surface or thickness 580. ILD deposition models mayinclude the use of oxide (SiO₂) or low-k material. It is recommended toinclude pattern-dependencies to acquire full-chip prediction,particularly when oxide CMP is inserted to planarize the ILD layer. Assuch, pattern-dependent oxide deposition and oxide CMP models may beused and may require the loading of model calibration parameters 520.The use of the prediction component in this manner may also facilitatethe introduction of low-k materials into a damascene process flow. Theresult of this step is a prediction of the wafer surface beforephotoresist is added and lithography is performed 580. The wafer surfacetopography is saved in a database or filesystem for use in prediction insubsequent interconnect levels 578. Although it is not necessary to feedwafer topography forward between interconnect levels, it is recommended,particularly in cases where an oxide CMP step is not performed after ILDdeposition.

Although photoresist deposition is not explicitly shown in this flow, incases where pattern dependencies affect planarity of photoresist, thenpattern-dependent photoresist models may be incorporated between ILDdeposition and lithography models (or incorporated directly into thelithography models using test-wafers and lumping the photoresist andlithography effects into one model).

d. Prediction of Feature Dimension Variation Using Lithography Models

The lithography modeling and prediction component could be consideredpart of the process modeling component. However the process modelingcomponent 400 inputs pre-process wafer topography and predictspost-process wafer topography at each step in the flow. Where as thelithography component inputs incoming wafer topography, along with thedesign or pattern to be imaged, and predicts feature dimensionvariation. As such they are treated as separate components (section c.and section d.) in this description.

As illustrated in FIG. 22A, the predicted wafer topography variation(Δh) across the chip 580 (e.g., the topography resulting from processinglevels 1 through N) and the current layout information 601, design orextraction, (e.g., the design from level N+1) are input into lithographymodeling component 600 which is used to map the predicted wafertopography and desired (or designed) feature width (FW*) to thelithography printed feature dimension (for example, feature width(FW_(p))) variation across the chip 740. The lithography process flow600 may also characterize pattern dependencies 640 in lithography due tosub-wavelength distortions using data from test wafers or opticalmathematical relationships. This mapping may be computed within thesystem or the results from optical proximity correction (OPC) may becomputed, loaded into the system and used. The result is that predictedvariation in printed feature dimension would address width variation dueto topography and distortion, shown respectively in FIGS. 8 and 9.

To capture pattern dependent width variation due to etch processing orto map topographical variation to etched features, an etch model may beused 641 to map printed features to the physically etched features. Asshown in FIG. 22B, component 641 acquires 651 the printed featurevariation that results from topographical 620 and distortion 640. Anetch model is used to characterize pattern dependencies and mapfull-chip printed feature variation to physical or etched featurevariation. The etch model prediction may also include etchcharacteristics such as trench depth, sidewall angle and trench width. Atable is constructed that maps 655 printed variation from each discretegrid from layout extraction to physical feature variation. The variationmay also be applied 656 to the layout features within each grid toadjust the full-chip design to the printed and physical variation,depending on whether the prediction resolution needs to be at the gridor discrete feature level. (When 600 is used in conjunction withverification component 810, the grid level feature variation is appliedto the discrete layout features and step 656 may be skipped). By usingcomponents 620, 640 and 641 within the lithography flow model 600, theprimary contributors to feature width variation may be characterized andpredicted 740. The optional etch component 641 may be used with eitherof the two approaches described in the following paragraphs.

A graphical illustration that depicts the current layout informationprojected onto the predicted surface topography for a die 608 is shownin FIG. 23. The die is discretized to the level chosen in step 312 oflayout extraction, which controls the resolution of the thickness andfeature dimension variation prediction. The lithography modelingcomponent 600 maps 612 the designed width and die surface height at thatgrid location to corresponding feature variation (for example, in FW orCD) at the same grid location 364. The mapping does this for all gridlocations across the die, resulting in a full die map of featuredimension variation.

Two ways for computing feature dimension variation from chip topographyare described. The first approach, shown in FIGS. 24 and 25, usesconventional optical proximity correction type tools to determine theeffects of feature density and optical interference during the actualimaging. The second approach, shown in FIGS. 26 and 27, uses test wafersand calibration methods to characterize both topographical and patterninterference effects due to sub-wavelength distortion.

FIG. 24 describes the steps for mapping chip surface height ortopography variation and current design features to variation in thelithography printed or imaged feature dimensions of those features 620.The predicted full-chip topography (Δh), consisting of each discreteelement across the die, is loaded 622 into the component 620 along withthe current design or extraction 601. The difference between chiptopography and a common reference, for example a test or alignment keynear the edge of the die, is computed 624. Since the imaging systemfocal length may be adjusted to an alignment or test key, this wouldallow for rapid computation of features within and outside thedepth-of-focus. A table is assembled that maps chip-level heightvariation to layout features (e.g., metal level N+1) within eachdiscrete grid. There are a number of optical mathematical expressionsfor relating focal distance to feature resolution that may be used tomap 626 chip surface topography and design features. Similarly, thereare tools for mapping layout extraction parameters to the associatedfeature dimension variation for each feature, grid, or an aggregatemetric (e.g. maximum or mean) for the entire die. A common relationshipmay be derived from the well-known Rayleigh equations for optics, usingk₁ and k₂ constants appropriately derived or provided for a particularlithography tool. The variation in feature dimension can be applied tothe layout features within the grid resolution of the chip surfaceprediction to generate a full-chip prediction of printed featuredimension (e.g. FW or CD) 628. The full-chip prediction of printedfeature dimensions (e.g. line widths) is provided 740 to theverification component 800.

FIG. 25 describes the steps for mapping pattern feature densities tovariation in lithography printed or imaged feature dimensions 640. Thelayout for the current design level is loaded and a table is assembledthat maps layout features to discrete grids in chip surface topographyprediction Δh. Conventional optical proximity algorithms, many of whichare commercially available in EDA tools, are used to map feature densityto feature dimension variation 644. The computed feature dimensionvariation is at the layout feature resolution that is provided at boththe layout resolution and extraction resolution 646. The resultingcomputation of feature dimension or feature width variation is thenprovided 740 to the verification component 800.

The second approach to implementing the lithography modeling andprediction component 600 is illustrated in FIGS. 26 and 27. The secondapproach uses methods described in section c. to generate a calibratedlithography model for relating surface height, designed CD, and featurewidth FW, and pattern interference effects to feature dimensionvariation (e.g. CD and FW). The model is calibrated using the stepsdescribed in section c. and illustrated in the flow diagram of FIG. 20.

The use of test wafers for calibrating a lithography model for aparticular tool and settings are illustrated in FIG. 26A. A lithographytest wafer die 679 is patterned with a range of width and space values680 (density can be computed given both FW and FS) that may include oneor more levels of structures. The structures on these levels may bechosen to represent multi-layer effects of variations in line widths andlines, and via chains and other structures, to capture patterndependencies associated with design levels of interest (e.g.interconnect levels). Further details and examples of test waferstructures that may be used are provided in section f. The test wafer isprocessed on a lithography tool using a given recipe 681 and then asubsequent etch process is performed to remove material according tocritical dimensions printed during lithography. The resulting variationin feature dimensions (e.g. CD or FW) is measured across the chip 683using a metrology tool 684 (e.g., an SEM, a physical surface profilingtool, or an optical feature profiling tool). The measured parameters areused to calibrate a lithography model that provides the mapping 682between the two spaces 680 and 684. This mapping, dictated by thecalibration model parameters, may be considered a model that maps a widerange of feature and surface topography values 680 to a particularfeature size variation 684 for this tool and recipe.

These mappings or calibrated models may be used for predicting featuresize variation for new IC designs, as shown in FIG. 26B. The width,space (and density) of features that fall within the range 686 spannedby the test die are extracted 685 from a new IC layout. The extractedfeatures 685 for spatial locations across the chip 486 are input intothe mapping 682 and an accurate prediction of feature size variationacross the chip 689 and 690 can be acquired for a given tool and a givenrecipe before processing of the new IC design.

The predicted process variation may also be fed into electrical modelsor simulations to assess the impact of processing on the electricalperformance of the chip, similarly to what is shown in FIG. 19B. Some ofthe electrical parameters that may be computed using the models includevariation in sheet resistance, resistance, capacitance, interconnect RCdelay, voltage drop, drive current loss, dielectric constant, timingclosure, signal integrity, IR drop or cross-talk noise. Thesepredictions can be used to determine the impact of feature sizevariation on electrical performance.

FIG. 27 describes the steps for computing predicted feature dimensionvariation using pattern-dependent lithography models. This approach mayalso use lithography test wafers, examples of which are provided insection f., to calibrate the model to, for example, a particularlithography tool, features, or a stack of levels below the currentdesign level, and photoresist type. The predicted (or in some cases,measured) chip level surface height variation Δh from the prior processstep or steps (e.g. ILD deposition, oxide CMP, or photoresist spin-on)is loaded 580. The layout information associated with the current designlevel, which may consist of layouts, extractions, or a combination ofthem, is also loaded from file system or database 601. The calibrationmodel parameters are loaded into the model for prediction 602. Apattern-dependent lithography model is used to predict feature sizevariation for the given design layout 674 and provides 740 it to theverification component 800.

e. Verification and Correction of Lithographic Feature DimensionVariation

The predicted feature dimensions are then compared to the designspecifications to verify that none of the printed (or etched) featureswould exceed the specifications and tolerances for the design. Thosesites or features that do exceed the tolerances are identified and theircoordinates stored. As described in FIG. 10, the feature widthvariations may also be used to modify a design file, which can be fedinto an electrical simulation to examine the electrical impact onperformance. The feature width variation may also be combined withtopographical variation for full interconnect level electricalcharacterization as well. Within the context of the methods describedhere, electrical impact also includes full-chip prediction of sheetresistance, total copper loss, capacitance, drive current and timingclosure parameters. In the verification mode, modification to the designfile of the feature width variation is primarily for simulation purposesand to simply reflect the variation induced by manufacturing. Suchdesign files would not be used for mask creation. To correct for thepredicted feature width variation, the following mask correctionapproach may be performed.

The user may also choose to have the system correct the designedfeatures used in making the masks so that the actual printed dimensionswould equal the desired or designed values. The corrected design is thenused during tape-out to construct masks such that the actual lithographyprinted dimensions and features yield those originally designed anddesired. The following paragraphs and figures describe the verificationand correction components.

A flow diagram of how the verification and correction component fitsinto the overall concept is shown in FIG. 28. Layout information, whichmay include design and extraction data 601, predicted criticaldimensions, and feature sizes 680, are loaded into the verification andcorrection component 800. The critical dimension and feature sizespecifications are also loaded 750 and, optionally, electricalspecifications may be loaded for comparison with simulated electricalperformance of the printed circuit dimensions. Verification performs acomparison between predicted and specified dimensions and identifiesthose features that exceed design tolerances (e.g., feature sizevariation or electrical performance). The verification component may beused alone or in conjunction with the correction component 830 to modifythe layout (e.g., GDS file) to produce the desired printed circuitdimensions. Depending on whether either or both verification andcorrection components are used, the results may be saved to a filesystem or database for further viewing and analysis by the user 930.When correction 830 is used, the resulting layout may be further testedfor sub-wavelength optical distortion and optical proximity correctionor directly sent in the form of a GDS file to the mask tape-out process,the first step of mask creation 930.

The verification component may be implemented in three ways dependingupon how the user has specified the grid resolution of layout extraction312, which also defines the resolution of the topography prediction. Asdescribed in section a., a finer grid resolution during extractiongenerally provides a more accurate representation of the minimum featuresizes on the chip. However there is a significant increase in thecomputational time and resources necessary to shrink grid size to finerfeatures. It is left to the user to determine the correct tradeoff;however the following paragraphs provide two approaches to verificationthat address grid resolution larger (shown in FIG. 29A) than the featuredimensions and smaller (shown in FIG. 29B) than the feature dimensions.It is unlikely that one could choose a single grid resolution that wouldaccommodate all IC features. However in the case that hierarchical gridresolution is tailored to underlying feature size, a method is alsoshown in FIG. 29C for verification when the grid resolution matches thefeature resolution or it is computationally necessary to use the gridresolution.

In all cases, feature width variation may be imported into electricalsimulation or extraction tools to characterize the electrical impact aswell as the physical impact. It may also be beneficial to verify theelectrical performance of a complete interconnect level and as such, onemay combine topographical variation from subsequent ECD or CMP steps andimport both variation calculations into electrical extraction tools.Such electrical characterization could be performed at the full-chiplevel or for some critical sub-portion of the circuit.

Another approach is described in FIG. 29D that uses a statisticaldescription of each grid (e.g. maximum, minimum, and mean feature size,or density) to determine if any features on the chip will violatetolerances. While computationally much faster, this approach may provideless accuracy than the approaches in FIGS. 29A, 29B and 29C in terms ofmodifying the individual features within the discrete grids. In thisapproach, a general heuristic is used to change features relative thedistribution for that grid (e.g., shrink the minimum features within agrid by 10%).

Verification for discrete grid sizes greater than the minimum ICdimensions is described in FIG. 29A. In the first step, the designlayout for the current layout level (e.g., interconnect level N+1) andthe lithography step are loaded 812. The full-chip predicted featuredimension variation 680 from lithography is also loaded 814. Thepredicted variation for each grid is apportioned to the features withinthe grid according to the (possibly probabilistic) distribution offeature dimensions within the grid 816. For interconnect levels, much ofthis apportionment may be the shrinking and bloating of lines. This step816 is done to provide a common basis for comparison between the layoutfeature and predicted dimensions. The design specifications andtolerances for the chip or given IC level are loaded into the system818. A comparison is made between the mapped variation from step 816 andthe specifications 820 and those values that exceed the given toleranceare stored 822. The user is then notified whether the current design hasany areas that exceed the tolerance and, if not, the design is certifiedas passing the verification check.

Verification for discrete grid sizes less than the minimum IC dimensionsis described for Option A in FIG. 29B. The only difference between FIGS.29A and 29B is the third step 826 where, in FIG. 29B, the values fordiscrete grids are averaged over a feature dimension to compute apredicted value at the same resolution as the layout. This is done toprovide a common basis for comparison between the layout feature andpredicted dimensions.

Verification for discrete grid sizes that are equal to the minimum ICdimensions is described for Option C in FIG. 29C. The only differencebetween FIG. 29C and FIGS. 29A and 29B is the removal of any need totransform the predicted values to the same resolution as the layout andas such, there is no need for any step 816 or step 826. Additionallythis approach can be used with a general heuristic that checks forviolations at the extraction resolution, computes corrections (in 830 ofFIG. 30) and applies them to all features within the grid (e.g., shrinkall widths within the grid by 10%).

Another option, Option D, which is described in FIG. 29D, iscomputationally simpler than the other described methods but may providea less accurate assessment of feature dimensions. Rather than transformthe grid resolution to the layout resolution, the minimum, maximum, andmean widths or feature sizes are used to generate a distribution ofpredicted feature variation for each grid 828. The feature size designspecifications and tolerances are compared 829 with the distribution offeature dimension variation computed in 828 and the corrections (in 830of FIG. 30) are applied using a heuristic (e.g., bloat the minimum linewidths by 10%). Otherwise, the steps for Options C and D are verysimilar.

Verification results may be provided to the correction component 830, asillustrated in FIG. 30. In this component, modifications are computedfor individual feature dimensions that exceed the design tolerances 832and are used to physically modify feature dimensions in the electronicdesign layout to produce the desired printed or etched featuredimensions 920. In certain cases, dummy fill or other geometries mayneed to be repositioned. The design layout is then re-generated 280 andif dummy fill is modified significantly, a new extraction performed.

Two approaches for computing modifications to the layout are describedin FIGS. 31 and 32. In the following descriptions, feature dimensionsrelated to feature width (FW), feature space (FS) and critical dimension(CD) are used as an example of how a feature dimension is adjusted orcomputed but another feature dimension may be considered as well. Thefirst approach, shown in FIG. 31, uses the inverse, pseudo-inverse, orpartial derivatives of the M_(L) component 600 to map errors in printedfeature width FW_(p) to the desired width FW* in the layout. Thisapproach begins with the first grid location or feature that exceedstolerance 834. The desired FW*, FS* or other critical dimensions 601 maybe acquired from the extraction table or directly from the currentlayout level 836. Either the predicted lithography-based printeddimensions FW_(p) from the M_(L) prediction, or the feature-levelpredicted variation computed in steps 816 or 826 is acquired 838 fromthe verification component. The surface topography h is also acquiredfrom the M_(p) prediction 840 for use in the mapping of the desired andprinted line width spaces. The computations described in FIG. 33B areused to compute the partial derivative or gradient

$\frac{\partial{FW}^{*}}{\partial{FW}_{p}}$for the given topography h. Another approach is to invert the M_(L)transformation 600 described in FIGS. 22, 24 and 25, to yield:FW*=f(FW _(p))|_(h)where f is the explicit or approximate inverse of M_(L). The M_(L)transformation 600 may be optical equations (e.g. derived from Rayleighrelationships) applied to a particular lithography tool or apattern-dependent model developed using a lithography test wafer. Theerror between the desired and printed dimension is computed 844 as:E=f(FW*−FW_(p)). An adjustment to the feature is computed as:

${\Delta\; W} = {E \cdot \frac{\partial{FW}^{*}}{\partial{FW}_{p}}}$where ΔW is the adjustment to a feature width or dimension 846 and maybe done using the procedure illustrated in 33B. In an interconnectlevel, ΔW may be a shrinking or bloating of an array of lines. Thepredicted FW_(p) variation is recomputed for the modified width 848 andthe system iterates on steps 844, 846 and 848 until the error is withindesign tolerance. A check is made to see if all grids or features thatexceed tolerance have been adjusted, and if not the process continues852. If so 851, then the layout is physically modified 920.

The second approach, shown in FIG. 32, uses data obtained using alithography test wafer to map errors in printed feature width FW_(p) tothe desired feature width FW* in the layout. This approach begins withthe first grid location or feature that exceeds tolerance 853. Thedesired FW*, FS*, or other feature dimensions 601 may be acquired fromthe extraction table or directly from the current layout level 854.Either the predicted lithography-based printed dimensions FW_(p) fromthe M_(L) prediction or the feature-level predicted variation computedin steps 816 or 826 are acquired from the verification component 855.The surface topography h is also acquired from the M_(p) prediction 840for use in the mapping of the desired and printed line width spaces. Thecomputations, also described in FIGS. 33B and 34C, may be used tocompute the partial derivative or gradient

$\frac{\partial{FW}^{*}}{\partial{FW}_{p}}$for the given topography h. Another approach is to invert the M_(L)transformation 600 developed using the calibrated model to yield:FW*=f(FW _(p))|_(h)where f is the explicit or approximate inverse of M_(L). The errorbetween the desired and printed dimension or line width is computed 858as:E=f(FW*−FW_(p)). An adjustment to the feature is computed as:

${\Delta\; W} = {E \cdot \frac{\partial{FW}^{*}}{\partial{FW}_{p}}}$where ΔW is the adjustment to a feature width or dimension 860. In aninterconnect level, ΔW may be a shrinking or bloating of an array oflines. The predicted FW_(p) variation is recomputed for the modifiedfeature width 862 and the system iterates 865 on steps 858, 860, 862 and864 until the error is within design tolerance. A check is made to seeif all grids or features that exceed tolerance have been adjusted, andif not the process continues 868. If so 867, then the layout isphysically modified 920.

The feed-forward mapping from desired feature widths or dimensions FW*to printed feature widths or dimensions LW_(p) is shown in FIG. 33A. Theprocess models 873 predict chip surface topography h 874, which is thenfed into the lithography model M_(L) 875 along with the desireddimensions 872 from the design FW*, FS*, or CD*. The lithography model875 maps the desired width and associated chip topography to the actualprinted FW_(p) that occurs as a result of the lithography process 876.This mapping can be used to mathematically relate desired circuitdimensions to lithography printed dimensions for a given chiptopography.

When such a mapping is not mathematically invertible or may be complexand nonlinear, a partial derivative can be used to provide a linearapproximation of the inverse close to the feature dimensions ofinterest. This mechanism for relating variation in printed dimensionsback to the desired dimensions is illustrated in FIG. 33B. The error,which may be some function of the variation between desired and printeddimensions, is computed 880. The predicted chip topography h is alsoused 881. There are several ways to compute the gradient or partialderivative of the desired dimensions with respect to the printeddimensions. One approach may be to use data from a processed andmeasured lithography test wafer, described in FIG. 34C and described ingreater detail in section f. Another approach may be to feed featurewidth values near the desired FW* into the M_(L) component and store theresulting printed width variation FW_(p). From this table of values, thepartial derivatives can be computed as the change in FW* with respect toFW_(p) using procedures found in many calculus and applied mathematicstextbooks. Another approach, which may be applicable if M_(L) includes aseries of equations, is to linearize the equations about the line widthor feature size of interest. Linearization methods are provided in mostmajor applied mathematics and multi-variable controls textbooks.

The verification and correction components are the final steps incomputing the electronic design to be used in mask creation for eachdesign level (e.g., interconnect level). A summary is shown in FIG. 35,illustrating how the components described in sections a. through e. arecombined and used in an iterative fashion on each subsequent designlevel. For the first interconnect level 1001, the layout 1010 is usedwith a prediction component 1012 to generate chip-level topography whichis used along with the feature dimensions at the current design level toverify and correct any variation 1014 to the desired feature sizetolerances 1016. This process is repeated 1018 until all printed oretched feature dimensions, design, and electrical parameters (for thatlevel) are within design and feature size tolerances.

The full-chip topography for interconnect level 1 is propagated to level2 1020. For the second interconnect level 1002, the layout 1022 is usedwith a prediction component 1024 to generate chip-level topography whichis used along with the critical dimensions at the current design level(in this case, level 2) to verify and correct any variation 1026 to thedesired feature size tolerances 1028. This process is repeated 1030until all printed or etched dimensions, design, and electricalparameters are within tolerance. The full-chip topography forinterconnect level 2 is then propagated to level 3 1032 and the processcontinues until the final interconnect level is reached.

f. Creation and Use of Lithography Test Wafers

As described in the calibration procedures in section b., test wafersuse a variety of test structures to map the relationship between circuitfeatures and pattern dependencies within one or more process steps. Themethods we describe include the creation and use of test wafers tocapture pattern dependencies for lithography tools, photoresistmaterials, and deposition or a subsequent etch. A lithography test wafermay include test structures that characterize feature density andincoming topography (both single and multi-level effects) with regard tothe printed critical dimensions. The test wafer simulates the variety oftopography that an incoming wafer with a patterned circuit may have anddoes so by creating a controlled experiment where structures are variedto span a space of potential circuit patterns.

FIG. 36A illustrates how a test wafer may be used to characterizepattern dependencies in a lithography process. The pre-processed testwafer topography is measured according to a measurement recipe thatincludes x and y site locations 1600. (Additional information concerningmeasurement recipes may be found in U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/200,660, filed Jul. 22, 2002.) The measured data is assembled in atable that relates underlying circuit patterns (e.g. feature widths FW*and feature spaces FS) and the surface topography h (e.g. thickness)1602 for each x and y site location. The wafer is processed using theactual lithography process flow that is to be used with the finalproduction ICs. The lithography process flow may include multiple stepssuch as photoresist deposition, lithographic imaging, and a subsequentetch step. After processing the resulting width variation, in the formof printed or etched feature dimensions (e.g., widths FW_(p) andspaces), are measured 1606 and calculated 1608 at the x and y sitelocations.

A table of results are generated 1610 that may be used for calibrating apattern dependent lithography model, correcting design features to yielddesired printed or etched dimensions, or evaluating best practices(e.g., tool and process recipes) and consumables (e.g., photoresistmaterials) for a particular process flow, lithography and etch tool. Anexample of such a table is shown in FIG. 36B, where the (x, y) sitelocations are stored in columns 1620 and 1622, the designed or desiredline widths for (x, y) in column 1624, the measured surface topographyfor (x, y) in column 1626, the printed or etched dimensions for (x, y)in column 1628 and the difference between desired and printed (etched)features in column 1630.

“Printed” and “etched” are terms often used interchangeably in thisdescription. The reason is that it is often difficult to measure theprinted line width right after lithography imaging, so an etch step isperformed so that the features may be easier measured. Also etch maycontribute to the overall width variation, as well as variation in thetrench depth and sidewall, as a result of pattern dependencies. Asstated throughout this description it may be beneficial when predictingtotal feature width or size variation to consider lithography and etchtogether (as a flow) to address both printed and etched variation. Theimprovement of within-die etch uniformity and the availability ofcertain sensors and measurement approaches may eliminate the need toperform the etch step and provide direct measurements of printedfeatures. This approach and these wafers may be used in both cases.

A test wafer to capture pattern dependencies in lithography processes isshown in the following figures. FIG. 37A shows a multi-level test waferstack that begins with a silicon wafer 1056, followed by an ILD layer(e.g. oxide or low-k) 1054, a metal 1 layer 1052, a via 1 level 1051,and a metal 2 layer 1050. The test wafer stack is used to relatetopographical variation with regard to underlying patterns.

An example of a layout for metal level 1 is illustrated in FIG. 37B. Asection of varying line widths and spaces is used in metal level 1 1100to capture width and space dependencies in interconnect levels. Asection of varying array sizes are used in metal level 1 1200 to capturepattern interactions between arrays and vias. A section of varyingslotting structures are used in metal level 1 1250 to capturemulti-layer pattern interactions between slotting structures, lines, andvias.

An example of a layout for via level 1 is illustrated in FIG. 37C. Asection of fixed size and space via arrays are used 1400 to capturepattern interactions between via arrays and varying array structures inmetal level 1. A section of fixed size and space via chains are used1500 to capture pattern interactions between via chains and varyingslotting structures in metal level 1. The via level area between varyingline widths and spaces region is an ILD section with no structures tocapture interactions between lines in metal levels 1299.

An example of a layout for metal level 2 is illustrated in FIG. 37D. Asection of overlap line width and space structures are used in metallevel 2 1300 to capture width and space dependencies betweeninterconnect levels. Another section of overlap width and spacestructures are used in metal level 2 1401 to capture dependenciesbetween via arrays and metal levels. Another section of overlap widthand space structures are used in metal level 2 1501 to captureinterlayer dependencies among via lines, arrays, and slottingstructures.

The next few paragraphs and figures will describe the line width andspace interaction sections across the metal 1, via 1, and metal 2 layerswith strictures in areas 1100, 1299 and 1300 respectively. FIG. 38illustrates varying line widths and spaces 1110 across the largercomponent 1100 for metal level 1. FIG. 39 illustrates one arraystructure 1120 (within the 1100 section) with a fixed width of 0.35micron 1123 and space of 0.35 micron 1121 within each sub-section (suchas 1120) in metal level 1.

The via level between section 1100 of metal level 1 and section 1300 ofmetal level 2 is a solid ILD field (e.g. oxide or low-k material), sothere are no structures. FIG. 40 illustrates the type of structures inmetal level 2 in section 1122 of larger area 1300. The goal is tocharacterize line width and line space interactions between metallevels, so section 1300 has varying widths and spaces that overlap withthe fixed width and space in metal level 1 component 1120. This overlapallows for combinations of width and space values to better span thespace of all potential width and space combinations used in a productioncircuit. In this example, there are four overlap structures (1128, 1129,1130, 1131) within component 1122, which also lies within the largersection 1300. One area has a line width of 0.25 micron and line space of0.25 micron 1128. Another area has a line width of 2 microns and linespace of zero microns 1129. Another area has a line width of 0.13 micronand line space of 0.13 micron 1131. Another area has a line width of0.50 micron and line space of 0.50 micron 1130.

FIGS. 41A and 41B illustrate the overlap of the two metal levels. FIG.41A shows the structure 1124 with a fixed line width and line space inthe metal 1 level. FIG. 41A also shows the structure 1126 with varyingline widths and spaces in the metal 2 level. FIG. 41B illustrates howthe test wafer characterizes the interaction of the two levels bysuperimposing metal 2 on the metal 1 component. The overlap structuresare indicated in 1140, 1142, 1144, and 1146. The via level 1 for area1299 is a large ILD section which electrically separates the two metallevels and thus is not shown here.

The next set of figures and paragraphs describe the sections ofstructures that characterize array and via interaction 1200. FIG. 42illustrates a sample layout of structures in section 1200 of metallevel 1. The area defined in 1212 is magnified to show the type of largearray structures 1211 within an oxide field 1210. FIG. 43 shows, for thearea 1415 in via level 1 above 1212 in metal level 1, the type of largearrays of vias 1412, shown as gray squares in the magnified section1410.

FIGS. 44A and 44B illustrate the overlap of the metal and via levels.FIG. 44A shows the large array structures 1210 in the metal 1 level.FIG. 44A also shows via structures in the via 1 level. FIG. 44Billustrates how the test wafer characterizes the interaction of the twolevels by superimposing via level 1 on the metal 1 component. Theoverlap structures are indicated as 1211 and 1412.

The next set of figures and paragraphs describe the structures thatcharacterize the interaction between slotting structures, via chains,and overlapping metal lines. FIG. 45A shows the slotting structure area1250 of metal level 1 with three areas 1540, 1542, and 1544 selected fordepicting examples in FIG. 45B. In FIG. 45B, an example of lines with noslotting material are shown 1540. Examples of two different slottingtypes are shown in 1542 and 1544. A legend for the metal 1 (M1), via 1,and metal 2 (M2) levels for this section is provided 1546. FIG. 45Csuperimposes via chain structures of via level 1 (shown in 1550, 1552and 1554) over the slotting structures 1540, 1542 and 1544 shown in FIG.45B. FIG. 45D superimposes the metal 2 overlap lines that connect tometal level 1 through the via structures for the three types 1560, 1562,and 1564 of slotting structures. A legend is provided in 1566. Thiscompletes the description of the three areas of structures in thisparticular layout example.

The lithography test wafer concept illustrated in the prior figures isnot limited to these structures and may include any number of structuresthat can be used to characterize interaction of feature width, featurespacing, dummy fill, or slotting structures between metal levels andother via and metal levels. While it is not necessary to use the actualprocess flow preceding the lithography process step to be characterized,it is recommended when it is important to capture the types of incomingprocess dependent pattern dependencies the lithography process willreceive. Actual processing in creating the test wafer may also be usefulin characterizing the CMP and ECD processes that precede lithography aswell.

g. Applications

There is a wide range of applications for the methods described above.Two ways in which chip-level pattern dependencies, topographicalvariation, and imaged pattern densities respectively, cause variation inlithographic feature dimensions are shown in FIGS. 8 and 9. Thefollowing figures and paragraphs describe solutions using the proceduresdescribed in sections a. through f.

The next two figures describe solutions for the problems outlined inFIGS. 8 and 9. FIG. 46A describes how the methods may be applied toaddress the first problem of chip-level topographical variation. FIG.46B illustrates the surface topography variation from FIG. 8 with thesolution described in FIG. 46A. In this application, the level N layout2010 is loaded into a computer where the methods described above havebeen implemented in software 2008. The process model predictioncomponent 2012 performs required extractions and predicts the chip-levelsurface topography 2014. This variation in topography is also shown inFIG. 46B 2046, as well as the height variation at each grid location2048. The incoming chip-level topography 2014 and the level N+1 layout2026 are loaded into the lithography model component 2016, which is usedto predict the feature size (e.g. line width) variation 2018. Patterndependencies may also be extracted from level N+1 layout and used aswell 2013. The design tolerances 2022 are loaded into the computer 2008and compared 2020 to the predicted dimensions. The verification andcorrection component 2024 adjusts the layout and the process iteratesuntil satisfactory printed feature sizes (e.g. line widths) areachieved. The layout is then used to create the mask for layout levelN+1. The results of the solution described in FIG. 46A are shown in FIG.46B where the level N+1 mask 2039 feature dimensions w_(a) 2042 andw_(b) 2044 are adjusted 2040 in the layout such that the printedfeatures w₂ 2050 and w₁ 2052 are the desired width. This solution allowsthe lithography process to adjust printed features to within-die filmthickness variation 2048.

FIG. 47A describes an application to address the second problem offeature density variations that were described in FIG. 9. FIG. 47Billustrates a variation in feature densities, similar to that shown inFIG. 9, with the methods applied in FIG. 47A. In this application, thelevel N layout 2070 is loaded into a computer where the methods havebeen implemented in software 2069. The process model predictioncomponent 2072 performs required extractions and predicts the chip-levelsurface topography that may or may not be used in conjunction withfeature density information. Since optical interference due to featuredensity may vary with depth of focus, topographical information may beuseful.

The level N+1 layout 2071 is loaded into an extraction tool 2075, whichextracts pattern density information. The extraction may be performedusing the procedure described in section b. of an EDA tool or by usingan optical proximity correction tool. The feature density extraction andtopographical information 2074 are loaded into a lithography modelcomponent 2076, which is used to predict the feature size variation2078. The design tolerances 2082 are loaded into the computer 2069 andcompared 2080 to the predicted dimensions. The verification andcorrection component 2084 adjusts the layout and the process iteratesuntil acceptable printed feature sizes are acquired. The layout is thenused to create the mask for layout level N+1. The results of thesolution described in FIG. 47A are shown in FIG. 47B where the level N+1mask 2092 feature dimensions w_(a) 2096 and w_(b) 2098 are adjusted 2084in the layout such that the printed features w+Δ1 2102 and w+Δ2 ₂₁₀₄ arethe desired width. This solution allows the lithography process toadjust printed features to variation in feature densities, whether thefilm thickness is planar 2100 or varying 2046 (as shown in FIG. 46).

The method may also provide functionality similar to conventionalstepper technology. Whereas stepper technology allows lithographicimaging to adapt to wafer-level non-uniformity (such as bow or warp),the techniques may be used to adjust lithographic imaging to chip-levelor within-die variation. A basic illustration of how stepper technologyworks is illustrated in FIG. 48, which shows a mask with an IC patter2220 to be imaged onto the wafer surface at points A 2208 and B 2209 atdifferent heights. Steppers normally print within a defined area orfield that may include one or more die. The lithography tool measuresthe alignment marks 2212 and 2214 for both x and y alignments and tilt.Wafer-level variation 2210 such as warping and bowing is common wherethe characteristics of wafer surface at point A 2208 may be differentthan the wafer surface at point B 2209. The tool adapts the mask orreticle 2220 and associated optics to compensate for this variation overlonger distances. The focal plane f 2218 may or may not be adjusted tomaximize the resolving power. There also exist step and scan tools thatexpose the die in strips where the pattern is stitched together on eachstrip. In most of these applications, steppers adjust to wafertopography on length scales of 1 to 50 mm. Within-die or chip-leveltopography may vary at similar magnitudes as wafer-level; however theselength scales are on the order of 0.00008 mm to 25 mm. This situation isillustrated in the case shown in FIG. 49 where the mask or reticle 2223is adjusted (to wafer surface A 2208 of FIG. 48) to print IC featuresonto an ILD layer of a wafer 2201. The adjustments are made with regardto x and y alignment marks 2222 and tilt and potentially, focal distancef 2221. However chip-level variation 2224 occurs on a much smallerlength scale and certain features that are sufficiently different thanthe focal length may likely exceed the critical dimension tolerancesspecified in the design specification 2228.

The methods we have described may be used to complement conventionalwafer-level stepper technology and work as a miniature stepper thatadjusts to chip-level variation in printed images. The methods may beapplied as a chip-level lithography correction stepper (CLiCS) system2266 that receives the following inputs: layout and designspecifications 2260, lithography tool parameters and settings 2262 andtest wafer data 2264. The CLiCS system 2266 uses the steps shown inFIGS. 46A and 46B and FIGS. 47A and 47B to perform three basic functionsdescribed in 2268, 2270 and 2272. The first function is to verifywhether a given layout passes or fails the lithography process step fora given layout design level 2268. The second function is to identifyareas of the layout that exceed design tolerances 2270, (similar to thesituation depicted in 2271 also shown in FIG. 49). The third function isto modify the layout such that the printed (etched) dimensions andfeatures match the desired values or are within the design tolerances2272. The result is a modified layout that meets all the design andelectrical specifications and yields the desired printed (etched)feature dimensions 2274. The layout is then used to generate the maskset for lithography 2276.

In some cases, there may be a large performance benefit to squeezingparameters well within the design tolerances. This may be accomplishedby either reducing the tolerance limits or iterating between theprediction and correction components (as shown in 2024 of 46A or 2084 of47A) until the error is sufficiently reduced. The cost of continualoptimization of design and electrical parameters is that thecomputational burden will likely increase significantly. As such, thisdecision is left to the system user.

h. Implementations and Uses

The methods described above may be implemented in software running on acomputer or server that communicates with various components via anetwork or through other electronic media. The methods can be used as aDesign for Lithography (DfL) system that verifies whether a particularcircuit design will be created or imaged accurately on the wafer orcorrects the design where features will not be accurately reproduced.DfL incorporates lithography-related, within-chip pattern dependenciesinto decisions regarding the design and process development flow.

This section will describe how the software may be implemented and howit may communicate with other design and manufacturing components. Thissection will also describe how the software may be used with and withinlithography tools and electronic design automation (EDA) tools.

The components that comprise the method are constructed in software(e.g. Java, Tcl, Basic, SQL) and modularized such that the method may ormay not use all the components in the generation of measurement plans.For example, the method may only use process models to generate filmthickness variation, compare this with design specifications anddetermine those locations that are most likely to violate thespecification. The following descriptions describe the generalcomputational framework for the method.

FIG. 51 shows a useful software architecture described in the followingparagraphs. The user 2353 communicates with the system through agraphical user interface (GUI) 2354, such as a web browser. The GUI 2354allows the user to choose and upload electronic layout design files intothe system and view areas that require modification or areas of thedesign that have been modified by the design for lithography system.When the system is housed within an EDA tool the user may be a designer,and the GUI may be part of the EDA tool.

In general the GUI, as defined and used throughout this section, allowsthe user to choose, upload or transfer from another form of electronicmedia, electronic layouts, desired design rules, electrical performance,or CD variation for the particular device described by the design files.The user may also use the interface to select process and electricalmodels from a server or transfer or load models from another electronicmedia source or computer. The user may also use the interface to reviewthe results of lithography prediction, design faults and modificationsto the design. These results may be in the form of, for example:

-   -   histograms and other statistical plots,    -   full-chip images of wafer-state (including feature variation) or        electrical parameters at some point in time,    -   movies of full-chip topography such as film thickness, dishing,        erosion progression during a process step or flow,    -   movies of full-chip electrical parameter variation such as sheet        resistance, drive current, timing closure issues and        capacitance, and    -   tables of values.

The GUI 2354 communicates with a series of software components, servicesor functions 2355 (referred to here as the service module) that managethe flow of information throughout the system to the database and filesystem 2358 and computational core processes 2356 as well. The services2355 are modular and serve to initiate the computational core processes2356 that execute portions of the method and to assemble and format thecontent for display in the GUI. The modules may be created as scripts(e.g. in Perl, Java, or Tcl) that enable easier interaction with thedatabase using embedded SQL code and with the GUI using HTM_(L) , XM_(L)or dynamic HTM_(L) interpretation. These components also allow theability to initiate mathematical processes that perform the computationnecessary to determine the correct placement of dummy fill within thelayout.

The service module 2355 communicates with the computational core ofprocesses and functions 2356 that execute computational steps ofchip-level wafer topography, verification and design correction. Thiscore also does the effective pattern density computation and layoutextractions. This communication may include instructions, data, modelparameters, prediction results in tabular, image or movie forms andpointers to files in the file system.

The service module 2355 also communicates with electronic IC design(EDA) software or layout manipulation software 2357 to manipulate layoutinformation during extraction or to modify the design layout to yielddesired feature dimensions.

The database 2358 communicates with the service module 2355 via SQLcommands to manage system data such as measurement sites and locations,user profiles that specify permissions and preferred content andpresentation, user data which may include layout extraction data, designspecifications and rules, model parameters for particular tools andprocesses, and full-chip prediction results such as surface topology,resistance and capacitance. Examples of databases that may be usedinclude Oracle, Informix, Access, SQL Server, and FoxPro. The filesystem 2358 communicates with all the components 280, 300, 750 and 800to retrieve and store information saved as files, typically too large toefficiently store in the database.

The system may communicate directly with metrology equipment to generatemeasurement plans and to receive measurements before and afterlithography processing. The system may also communicate directly withelectronic design (EDA) tools to receive design layouts and to providemodified designs. The system may also communicate directly withelectronic design (EDA) tools and foundries to generate test structuresand test wafers and to develop and supply process flows and recipes tomanufacturing. This communication may be done via a computer network2359 or computer bus.

If the functionality shown in boxes A 2360 and B 2361 resides on onecomputer then the system is configured as stand-alone. If A and B resideon different computers and communicate across a network, the system isnormally considered a client-server configuration. A network may includeelectrical and optical communication via an extranet, intranet, internetor VPN. In some cases both A and B will be part of the EDA tool suiteand the user, 2353, is a designer.

Here we describe a few useful operational frameworks for applying thesystem to verify and correct designs to yield desired printed or etchedfeatures and dimensions. Other frameworks are also possible. There arethree basic computational frameworks described in this section thatconstitute good methods of operation and delivery of the functionalitybased upon a user's needs. The first framework presented is astand-alone configuration, shown in FIG. 52A, where the components 280,300, 750 and 800 of FIG. 10 reside in 2363 and data in and out (2364 and2365) are accessed from a single computer. The second framework is aclient-server configuration, shown in FIG. 52B, where the GUI resides ona client computer 2367 also shown as box A in FIG. 51, which accesses,via a network 2370 the other components, shown as box B in FIG. 51,residing on a server or multiple servers, a server farm 2371. Thecommunication could be done via internet, intranet or extranet networks2370 and the server may serve one or more clients or users.

The third framework, FIG. 53, is an extension of the client-server modelthat includes communication via a network 2376 with additional computersthat may contain one of more components of the system described insections b. through f. For example, a design house may utilize thedesign for lithography tools via the server 2380 but remotely utilizeseparate computers which house EDA tools 2382 or process models or modelparameters 2379 and design specifications 2378 that are provided by thefab or a process development group. This framework also includes thetransfer of measurement plan data to control computers on metrologyequipment 2381 and the return of actual measurements to the server 2380.This framework also includes the transfer of process relatedinformation, such as calibration model parameters, to and frommanufacturing or foundry computer systems 2381 to the server 2380. Thisframework also includes the transfer of information to optical proximitytools 2383 for feature density analysis and design correction.

The system and methods can be implemented and used as a Design forLithography (DfL) system that verifies whether a particular circuitdesign will be created or imaged accurately on the wafer and correctsthe design where features will not be accurately reproduced. The DfLsystem includes components 280, 300, 750 and 800 of FIG. 10 and provideslayout extraction, chip-level topography computation, lithography CDvariation computation, design verification, and design modification. Asshown in FIG. 54, the DfL system 2522 may be used with or implementedwithin electronic design automation (EDA) tools 2500 either directlyintegrated or communicating via bus or network through an applicationprogram interface (API). FIG. 54 illustrates where the DfL system 2522would fit within an EDA tool 2500, for example. Conventional EDA toolsmay have the following components: system-level design 2502, logicsynthesis 2504, design layout 2506, place and route 2508, physicalverification 2510, and signal integrity 2512. Each electronic designfile is used during the tape-out process to create masks 2514 which areused in manufacturing 2516 the production IC. Most design formanufacturing components interact with the physical verification andplace and route components. The DfL system 2522-2525 is not limited towhat component it may interact with and may include place and route2508, physical verification 2510, signal integrity 2512 and eventuallymask creation 2514. However, the most likely role is within the physicalverification component 2510, which ensures that a design abides by therules and constraints provided by manufacturing.

Potential uses of the DfL system include assistance in the placement andspecification of buffer regions for interconnect vias and lines duringplace and route. In this use, feature width variation or topographicalvariation could aid in determining where electrically active featuresand components should be positioned and how electrical features thatallow communication between these components (e.g. vias and lines) maybe routed across the device.

Potential uses of the DfL system include assistance in the placement andgeometrical dimensions of interconnect vias and lines to improve signalintegrity, timing issues and power distribution. In this use, featurewidth variation or topographical variation could aid in determining whatthe resulting feature geometries will be after processing and how theseelectrical features may be modified (e.g., bloated or shrunk by somepercentage to compensate for topography effects) geometrically toachieve better circuit performance or better device structural andreliability properties.

Potential uses of the DfL system include assistance in the placement andbuffer regions for dummy fill added to a design. In this use, featurewidth variation or topographical variation could aid in determiningwhere dummy or slotting objects should be positioned, the size of dummyand slotting objects and the buffer distance between dummy and slottingobjects and nearby electrically active regions.

These components may be combined to verify or correct for problems inthe electrical performance. The following example describes such amethod. First, the DfL system could be used to modify features on thecircuit layout. Next, the results would be passed to an RC extractiontool. Then, the RC extraction results would be used to re-simulate thecircuit performance. The resulting performance could be verified, oralternatively the circuit performance results could be used to makefurther modifications to the design layout. In addition, severaldifferent alternative layout modifications could be made; RC extractionand subsequent simulation run all options, and the best modified layoutchosen based on the circuit simulation performance.

FIG. 55 illustrates how a design group (or a design house) may use a DfLsystem 2659 that resides within, is directly bundled with, or directlycommunicates with an EDA tool 2670. Most designs begin withspecifications 2655 that include tolerances on feature size andresolution as well as electrical IC parameters. The design group 2656uses these specifications to guide them during the creation of anintegrated circuit 2657. During the process, one designer or subgroupmay do the logic design 2662. Another designer or subgroup may do thememory design 2664 and yet another may design the analog component 2666.A goal of design for manufacturing is to consider manufacturingconstraints at various stages of design that are generated with an FDAtool 2670. EDA tools may contain several design for manufacturingcomponents and the DfL 2659 system may be one of those components, asshown in FIG. 54. In this use, the DfL system continually verifies andcorrects 2656 designs as the components are designed and added by thedesigners. In this use, DfL system may directly interact with place androute functions, physical verification functions, electrical simulationand extraction functions and optical proximity functions to providefeature width variation data. This process may or may not includeiterative addition of dummy fill (as described in U.S. patentapplication Ser. Nos. 10/165,214, 10/164,844, 10/164,847, and10/164,842, all filed Jun. 7, 2002) as well. In cases, where the systemcannot find any corrections to the layout that achieves the designspecifications, the design group is notified of the design failure 2660.The foundry or manufacturing group provides manufacturing information2672 regarding the calibration of models to specific process tools andrecipes.

In that the DfL system provides a bridge of information flow between thedesign and manufacturing sides, the DfL system may also reside with themanufacturer or on the internet and communicate with design tools via anetwork connection. FIG. 56 illustrates a use of the DfL system 2697outside of or indirectly communicating with one or more EDA tools 2680.The design specifications 2682, which include CD or associatedelectrical tolerances, are provide to both the design group 2684 and thedesign for manufacturing components 2694. The designers use the EDA toolsuite to create and add components 2686, 2688 and 2690 into the IClayout 2686.

Each design level is completed 2692 and electronically transferred 2696via media, network or the internet to the design for manufacturingcomponents 2694, which includes the DfL system 2697. This frameworkincludes the use of the DfL component as a web service that communicatesvia the internet with both the design and manufacturing groups. Eachdesign level is processed using process information 2693, which includescalibration parameters regarding specific tools and recipe settings.Corrections to the design are uploaded to the EDA tool and server 2698.In cases where the system cannot find any corrections to the layout thatachieves the design specifications, the design group is notified of thedesign failure 2699. In the framework shown in FIG. 57 the DfL systemmay:

-   -   reside within tools in the lithography process flow and        communicate via a bus or network connection,    -   reside within an etch tool and communicate via a bus or network        connection,    -   reside on a network at a foundry that allows for process,        lithography (etch) models to be developed and managed by        manufacturing or process development personnel,    -   reside on a server physically located away from both the design        and manufacturing groups and communicates via a network, for        example, as a web service, or    -   reside at a design house or group but outside of a specific EDA        tool and may include network communication with a number of EDA        tools from different vendors, or    -   reside at a foundry and may communicate via a network with a        number of EDA tools from different vendors.

As shown in FIGS. 55 and 56, the DfL system may be used within a largerdesign for manufacturing system or server. An example of a design formanufacturing system is shown in FIG. 57. An IC design of one or morelevels is loaded 2800 and key pattern dependent parameters may beextracted. Process models or simulations of one or more steps 2802 andthat may be calibrated to tools and recipes 2804 and 2806 are used topredict full-clip topography 2808 (such as film thickness, dishing orerosion) or electrical parameters 2808 (such as sheet resistance,capacitance, cross-talk noise, drive current, timing closure values oreffective dielectric constant). Desired results such as physical andelectrical parameters and critical dimension tolerances, often derivedfrom the design specifications, are loaded into the system 2812. Acomparison is performed 2810 and those sites or IC features that exceedthe specified tolerances and the associated variation 2814 and 2816 areused to make corrections within the design or manufacturing processes.

The variation may be used as feedback to facilitate changes in thedesign process through use of a dummy fill component 2818 where the sizeand placement of dummy fill is determined and the design modified 2822.The selection and placement of dummy fill within an IC design level mayinclude the use of pattern dependencies to improve the physical andstructural makeup (e.g. use of low-k materials) and electricalperformance of the IC. When the variation is primarily due tolithography or the combination of surface variation and lithography, theDfL system or component 2820 may be used to modify 2822 the IC design2800.

The variation 2814 may be used to modify process parameters and recipesettings as well 2824. This component uses models calibrated at multiplerecipe settings and using various consumables to determine the bestknown process and consumable set. This component may provide thisinformation to a tool operator or modify tool recipe settings directly2826. This component may also be used to synthesize multiple processrecipe steps within a flow such that design parameters are optimized.The process optimization component may be used in conjunction with theDfL component 2820 to evaluate lithography tool settings and consumables(such as photoresist materials) with regard to yield and feature sizevariation. This component may also be used to generate measurementrecipes 2825 for measurements to be taken during calibration or actualmanufacture of the circuit 2825 (Additional information concerningselection of measurement locations is found in U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 10/200,660, filed Jul. 22, 2002.)

Once the design and manufacturing process parameters are synchronized toyield an optimal circuit, the electronic design is used to tape-out andcreate the masks used for lithography, including the addition of dummyfill structures within the design. The optimal process and measurementrecipes may also be transferred to respective tools within themanufacturing flow used to create the production circuit.

The DfL component may also be used to choose an optimal lithographyrecipe among lithography tool settings and consumables (e.g.photoresist). In this use, multiple recipes for the process stepsleading up to and including lithography are evaluated using test wafersdescribed in section g. and the calibration process described in sectionb. A new IC design can be loaded into the system and the process andlithography models evaluated across the multiple recipe calibrations toarrive at minimal feature size variation from the desiredspecifications. An illustration is shown in FIG. 58 where the systemuses the process described in FIG. 10 to predict first pass feature sizevariation or to iterate until an optimize printed feature size isreached for each set of calibration parameters associated with a recipecondition 2901, 2902, and 2903. The results are compared and the optimalrecipe setting is determined 2904. The calibration parameters for eachrecipe condition may be generated using the processes and test wafersdescribed above. The design for manufacturing system may also employoptimization methods to interpolate or synthesize among lithographyprocess flow recipe conditions.

Several screenshots of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) for design formanufacturing and design for lithography systems are shown in thefollowing figures. A GUI for the Layout Manager component, shown in FIG.59, allows the user to upload a layout through a web browser and webservices, which are automatically configured to add dummy fill for theappropriate processes and according to user defined design rules (alsoinput through a similar GUI). The three designs, 3161, 3162 & 3163, wereprocessed using the layout extraction algorithm to compute effectivedensity. Options are provided to the user to use our layout extractionmethods to compute feature width and space or to upload this informationfrom another source, 3164, 3165 & 3166.

The results of a layout extraction using the system are shown in theimages in FIGS. 60A and 60B. FIG. 60A shows a full-chip image 3167 ofextracted feature widths (line widths in this case) across the chipaccording to the scale shown on the right 3168. In FIG. 60B, the spatialline widths across the full-chip are shown 3169, 3170, 3171, 3172, 3173,3174 and 3175 according to which line width bin they fall into anduseful distributions may be formed. This information, as well as linespace, local and effective density may be input into the models topredict process and electrical variation.

A graphical user interface (GUI) for a design for lithography componentis shown in FIG. 61, operating within a design for manufacturabilityserver, GUI shown in FIG. 62. A browser 3300 is used as the GUI thatcommunicates with a web server based DfL component residing on a server.The benefit of using a browser is that almost every computer is nowequipped with a web browser and there is a great deal of standardizationacross the two major browsers from Netscape and Microsoft. A full-chiptopography image 3302 is shown and those sites (e.g., 1, 2 and 3) thatviolate feature dimension tolerances are indicated 3304. The sitelocations are also shown 3306. A button is shown that initiates thecorrection component that modifies the design to pass design tolerances3308.

The GUI for the design for manufacturing component is shown in FIG. 62and a good implementation again uses a web browser as the GUI. The dummyfill services and functions are grouped within the GUI into threeprimary components; design (4199), manufacture (4191) and model (4200).The screenshot in FIG. 62 shows in the header, 4190, and in thenavigation bar, 4191, that the user has selected the manufacturingcomponent. Within the manufacture component are subcomponents: fabs,tools, wafers, and measurement data. In this screenshot, tools, 4192,have been selected. There are three subcomponents under tools: types,recipes and flows. In this screenshot the user has selected types 4193.The types of tools and tool settings available to this user are shown4194. The available recipes for this tool type 4196 and available recipesequences 4197 for these tool types are shown. The system configured inthis screenshot has two process models available to the user 4198 forcalibration and prediction of copper CMP. The design component 4199 usesa layout manager to allow the user to upload and manage layouts andlayout extractions. One goal of the design for manufacturability systemGUI is to allow the user to manage all the data and results associatedwith design for lithography services.

Although some implementations have been described above, otherimplementations are also within the scope of the following claims.

1. A method for use in connection with fabrication of an integratedcircuit, comprising using a pattern-dependent model to predictvariations of feature dimensions of an integrated circuit that is to befabricated in accordance with a design by a process that includes (a) afabrication process that will impart topographical variations to theintegrated circuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, wherein thevariations are predicted based upon analysis of process interactions,and characterizing an impact of the variations of feature dimensions onelectrical characteristics of the integrated circuit.
 2. A method foruse in connection with fabrication of an integrated circuit, comprisingusing a pattern-dependent model to predict topological variations of anintegrated circuit that is to be fabricated in accordance with a designby a process that includes (a) a fabrication process that will imparttopographical variation to the integrated circuit and (b) a lithographyor etch process, wherein the variations are predicted based uponanalysis of process interactions, and characterizing an impact of thetopological variations on electrical characteristics of the integratedcircuit.
 3. The method of claim 2 also including predicting variationsof feature dimensions of the integrated circuit and determining animpact of the variations, of feature dimensions of the integratedcircuit.
 4. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 in which the electricalcharacteristics include sheet resistance, capacitance, drive current,signal integrity, power distribution and, when multiple interconnectlevels are considered, timing closure analysis.
 5. The method of claim1, 2, or 3 also including verifying that the design meets predeterminedcriteria.
 6. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also including adjustingmasks used in the lithography or etch process in accordance with thedetermined impact.
 7. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also includingadjusting the design in response to the determined impact to improvemanufacturability of the integrated circuit.
 8. The method of claim 1,2, or 3 also including adjusting the design in response to thedetermined impact to improve circuit performance of the integratedcircuit.
 9. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 in which the prediction isperformed with respect to an interconnect level of the integratedcircuit.
 10. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 in which the prediction isperformed with respect to an multiple levels of the integrated circuit.11. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also including determining placementof dummy fill or slotting structures based on the determining of theimpact.
 12. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also including determiningthe placement of electrical components in the integrated circuit basedon the determining of the impact.
 13. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3also including determining the routing of interconnect regions betweenelectrical components of the integrated circuit based on the determiningof the impact.
 14. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 in which theintegrated circuit comprises a system-on-chip (SoC) device and themethod also includes determining the routing of interconnect regions inthe SoC device.
 15. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also includingdetermining geometry of electrical features, interconnect lines, or viasin the design of the integrated circuit based on the determining of theimpact.
 16. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 also including using anelectronics design automation (EDA) tool in conjunction with thepredicting and the determining.
 17. The method of claim 1, 2, or 3 inwhich at least one of the predicting and the determining is provided asa service in a network.
 18. The method of claim 17 in which the networkcomprises an intranet, an extranet, or an internet, and the predictingor determining is provided in response to user requests.
 19. A methodfor use in connection with fabrication of an integrated circuit,comprising using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variation to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, wherein the variationsare predicted based upon analysis of process interactions, andcharacterizing an impact of the topological variations on electricalcharacteristics of the integrated circuit, and using an RC extractiontool in conjunction with the using of the model and the determining ofthe impact.
 20. A method for use in connection with fabrication of anintegrated circuit, comprising using a pattern-dependent model topredict topological variations and variations of feature dimensions ofan integrated circuit that is to be fabricated in accordance with adesign by a process that includes (a) a fabrication process that willimpart topographical variation to the integrated circuit and (b) alithography or etch process, wherein the variations are predicted basedupon analysis of process interactions, and characterizing an impact ofthe topological variations on electrical characteristics of theintegrated circuit, and using an RC extraction tool in conjunction withthe using of the model and the determining of the impact.
 21. The methodof claim 19 or 20 in which the using is performed on sub-portions of thecircuit.
 22. The method of claim 1 or 20 in which the feature dimensionsare associated with at least one of printed feature width, etch trenchwidth, etch trench depth, etched sidewall angle, dishing, erosion, ortotal copper loss.
 23. The method of claim 1, 2, 19, or 20 in which theelectrical characteristics comprise at least one of sheet resistance,capacitance, drive current, signal integrity, power distribution and,timing closure.
 24. The method of claim 19 or 20 in which at least oneof the predicting or the determining is provided as a service in anetwork.
 25. The method of claim 24 in which the network comprises anintranet, an extranet, or an internet, and the predicting or determiningis provided in response to user requests.
 26. A computer program productcomprising a tangible computer usable medium having executable code toexecute a process for use in connection with fabrication of anintegrated circuit, the process comprising: using a pattern-dependentmodel to predict variations of feature dimensions of an integratedcircuit that is to be fabricated in accordance with a design by aprocess that includes (a) a fabrication process that will imparttopographical variations to the integrated circuit and (b) a lithographyor etch process, wherein the variations are predicted based uponanalysis of process interactions, and characterizing an impact of thevariations of feature dimensions on electrical characteristics of theintegrated circuit.
 27. A computer program product comprising a tangiblecomputer usable medium having executable code to execute a process foruse in connection with fabrication of an integrated circuit, the processcomprising: using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variation to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, wherein the variationsare predicted based upon analysis of process interactions, andcharacterizing an impact of the topological variations on electricalcharacteristics of the integrated circuit.
 28. The computer programproduct of claim 27 also including predicting variations of featuredimensions of the integrated circuit and determining an impact of thevariations of feature dimensions of the integrated circuit.
 29. Thecomputer program product of claim 26 or 27 in which the electricalcharacteristics include sheet resistance, capacitance, drive current,signal integrity, power distribution and, when multiple interconnectlevels are considered, timing closure analysis.
 30. The computer programproduct of claim 26 or 27 also including adjusting masks used in thelithography or etch process in accordance with the determined impact.31. The computer program product of claim 26 or 27 also includingadjusting the design in response to the determined impact to improvemanufacturability or circuit performance of the integrated circuit. 32.The computer program product of claim 26 or 27 also includingdetermining placement of dummy fill, slotting structures or electricalcomponents based on the determining of the impact.
 33. The computerprogram product of claim 26 or 27 also including determining the routingof interconnect regions between electrical components of the integratedcircuit based on the determining of the impact.
 34. A system for use inconnection with fabrication of an integrated circuit, comprising meansfor using a pattern-dependent model to predict variations of featuredimensions of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variations to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, wherein the variationsare predicted based upon analysis of process interactions, and means forcharacterizing an impact of the variations of feature dimensions onelectrical characteristics of the integrated circuit.
 35. A system foruse in connection with fabrication of an integrated circuit, comprising:means for using a pattern-dependent model to predict topologicalvariations of an integrated circuit that is to be fabricated inaccordance with a design by a process that includes (a) a fabricationprocess that will impart topographical variation to the integratedcircuit and (b) a lithography or etch process, wherein the variationsare predicted based upon analysis of process interactions, and means forcharacterizing an impact of the topological variations on electricalcharacteristics of the integrated circuit.
 36. The system of claim 35further comprising means for predicting variations of feature dimensionsof the integrated circuit and determining an impact of the variations offeature dimensions of the integrated circuit.
 37. The system of claim 34or 35 in which the electrical characteristics include sheet resistance,capacitance, drive current, signal integrity, power distribution and,when multiple interconnect levels are considered, timing closureanalysis.
 38. The system of claim 34 or 35 further comprising means foradjusting masks used in the lithography or etch process in accordancewith the determined impact.
 39. The system of claim 34 or 35 furthercomprising means for adjusting the design in response to the determinedimpact to improve manufacturability or circuit performance of theintegrated circuit.
 40. The system of claim 34 or 35 further comprisingmeans for determining placement of dummy fill, slotting structures orelectrical components based on the determining of the impact.
 41. Thesystem of claim 34 or 35 further comprising means for determining therouting of interconnect regions between electrical components of theintegrated circuit based on the determining of the impact.